You may remember that in last month's "Dragnet" we quoted from an invitation printed in The National Catholic Reporter. That weekly's editor, Tom C. Fox, urged his readers to sign up with certain "lists" (online discussion groups) on the Internet. From his description of the recommended lists, it seemed to us that they all had a decided, well, list--to the far left. Fair enough. NCR is a left-wing paper, and one wouldn't expect it to recommend that its readers sign up with conservative lists. For our part, we thought it fair to make these same lists known to our readers, most of whom would not describe themselves as left-wing, and to urge them to sign up. They thereby could inject a small bit of orthodoxy into cyberspace. You'd have thought we were urging them take to the streets in order to force a repeal of the First Amendment, so heated were some of the messages written to me by members of Sister-L, one of the lists recommended by Fox. For the details you will have to read the article. As you do so, please keep this question in mind: On which side, the orthodox or the heterodox, do we see, in practice and not just in theory, an openness to real discussion and not just to a party line? The orthodox are supposed to be closed-minded, while the heterodox praise themselves for their willingness to consider all sides--but all this strikes me as special pleading. What do you think?