Re: Objects, Motives, and the List - a forward from the past

Judy Diamondstone (diamonju who-is-at rci.rutgers.edu)
7 Oct 1999 23:43:11 -0000

Bill, your paper & Eva's dramatize the essential role that both math and
visual aids now play in semiosis and of course any metasemiotic research.
Whatever role they play, I am in this area a literacy neanderthal. As I
indicated in my previous note addressed to Nate, it isn't easy to digest
material that depends on critical abstractions from a different discipline,
even when they are as conscientiously explained as they are in your paper.
I'm grateful for all the explanation of notions that are so useful for
thinking about complex systems and "seeing" across strata of the system....
but you can't explain it all. I didn't mean to take time to respond to your
paper now, but I read your note and want to chime in, that this stuff is
very exciting.=20

for now -- judith

At 03:04 PM 10/3/99 -0400, you wrote:
>At 6:27 PM +0200 10/3/99, Eva Ekeblad reposted what Arne Raeithel wrote:
>
>> First, the form of open distribution list with weak moderation that
>>XLCHC and its side-lists offer, is inherently unstable. It is prone to
>>sudden bursts of exchange or protracted silence. The dynamics is much more
>>externally governed (by the rhythm of the academic year and conferencing)
>>than it is determined by the content of the dicussion threads or by
>>reaching a kind of consensus. This is most obvious for old outsiders like
>>me having a different background rhythm; for newcomers it is one of the
>>most frustrating properties of open lists.
>
>I find Arne's posting exciting, with ecological considerations of
electronic discussions illuminating of what Eva and I have been working
on/playing with, and recognizing the same bursts in mailflow that we have
been trying to understand. I wish I had been around when he was.
>
>Arne's message is particularly relevant today as Luiz has raised the
specter of information processing. I'd like to address the issues of
computational metaphor and information processing, in that the first does
not necessitate the second. In the case of the computational model of xmca
population behavior that appears in my latest paper, I have been exploring
the regulation of list postings by the expenditure of labor in a system of
readers and writers. As a model it is a little more complex than Yrj=F6's
triangles, and some of the 'thinking' with the model is offloaded onto the
machine (interestingly combined with the 'thinking' of the MIT minds who
created the modeling program, also materialized in the machine, and,
progressing into the past, the others through history who have contributed
to the development of that computational system...). =20
>
>As a computational metaphor, the model explores the consequences of our
communicating with each other having to pass through the working of our
fingers on the key board -- the actions and operations of the physical
labor of reading and writing. The model is certainly not equivalent to
saying that people are like computers or that people are just sites for
embodied time. It is a tool for understanding how the flow of time,
together with the labor of multilogue, regulates our communications. So we
find the model can reproduce the bursts of exchange that share the same
mathematical patterns as does the real list. I find this surprising and
energizing, and become intensely curious about why it behaves like our xmca
population does, when I know there are so many differences between the two.
>
>I wonder if Luiz' message is indicative of the recognition of unfavorable
sentiment towards quantitative studies and computation. In all honesty, I
felt this concern, and it made me hesitate to link my paper to the xmca
page, and it has also driven discussion in the paper towards the affordances
of the model and modeling, the minimization of technical content through
thumbnailed graphs, links that pushed that content off into other windows,
and links to introductory material on the web. Like Arne of 1993, I have
been concerned about the flare ups on this list lately, that appear more as
swarms of sentiment -- a reactive nature -- than of a synergistic reflective
nature. Mind you, I have remembered back to times when I have reacted and
other time's when I have caught myself wanting to do so, and I am not
casting any stones.
>
>Like Arne's second message, I find that it is a sunny day, and I'll stop
here so that the weather can be better appreciated. I also just had a great
chocolate, organic, whole milk and it is inviting me to nap.
>
>Bill Barowy, Associate Professor
>Lesley College, 31 Everett Street, Cambridge, MA 02138-2790=20
>Phone: 617-349-8168 / Fax: 617-349-8169
>http://www.lesley.edu/faculty/wbarowy/Barowy.html
>_______________________
>"One of life's quiet excitements is to stand somewhat apart from yourself
> and watch yourself softly become the author of something beautiful."
>[Norman Maclean in "A river runs through it."]
>
>
>

Judith Diamondstone (732) 932-7496 Ext. 352=09
Graduate School of Education
Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey
10 Seminary Place =09
New Brunswick, NJ 08901-1183