The term "lurker" when referring to many of the Xmca ers who are
"listening" rather than responding is a very negative label.
What's great about this list is not only the caliber of the discussions
but the fact that one can learn and enjoy without being forced to respond.
Similar to classrooms, where many very quiet and introspective students are
learning more than those who rattle and prattle to impress the teacher.
Some of these students and some of these "lurkers" are of the mind that
they do not wish to speak unless it improves the silence.
But to flippantly refer to them as "lurkers" may make them feel that the
"publish or perish world" of inane studies and mindless research filling
many journals and dissertations is creeping into the Xmca protocol. I'm
sure that this is not what's intended, but the implicit curriculum
sometimes is more damaging than the explicit.
What I love about this list and on going discussions is that much is
learned from people thinking out loud and modeling the thought processes
for other "experts" in the field and the novitiate who are learning. This
is why we have two ears and two eyes but only one mouth.
Just one voice crying in the wilderness of cyberspace