non-institutionalized participation

Judy Diamondstone (diamonju who-is-at rci.rutgers.edu)
Mon, 29 Sep 1997 10:45:44 -0400

HURRAY, Eugene. I like keeping in sight the view:

>Waste for ones is food for others. We all are
>newcomers.
>
>Let's keep it that way. What do you think?

I have been reflecting on the role of a Wiz in this &/or other
[ever-]emergent communities of practice. In general, the role of
a Wiz in the 5th Dimension projects and in this more dispersed
setting, as I understand it, is to carry the ethics and concerns
of the project forward. In the 5D, the Wiz is an absent other,
non-localized, an object of projection for the kids (emphasize
YOUNGSTERS here). The kids can get a kick out of treating the
powerful Wiz as an object of ridicule, as the culprit behind
whatever goes wrong in the 5D. All of this is institutionalized.

But in this setting, the wiz is always necessarily located,
identified by the e-mail name&address of the message perceived
as wiz-ened. How "hidden" are the aims of a wizened message in this
community of practice? If we think of only some messages as wizened, then
only those "onto" the project get the point. We've insitutionalized
the project, and risk subjecting our Wiz's to a feeling/belief
that they are themselves Wizards. And Wizdom may get in the way of wisdom.

Oldtimers totter on this line, unless we acknowledge that our wizdom
is dispersed; unless we see the wizziness of CHAT in all involved.

Poor Mike! Have I butchered a great idea? In Eugene's words,
What do you think?

Judy

At 07:36 PM 9/28/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Hello everybody--
>
>Eva, your description of newcomer's embarrassment seems to me very accurate
>for many XMCA newcomers, including myself. However, it is not in the
>spirit of our community to make ground for this embarrassment. Let me
>explain.
>
>I do not think that there is such a thing as "interruptions" on the xmca
>net (and dare to say in the non-virtual world) as an "objective,
>"out-there" phenomenon. "Interruptions" are constructive responses to
>others' contributions, stressing reluctance to see connections among
>actions of different people in the equally fragmented and interconnected
>world. People have many needs and reasons to post something on the net.
>Some postings seem to get along with others and are considered by some
>participants as conversations. Others can't find their interested net
>respondents in a given moment (that lasts a day or two until the xmca
>people still remember about the message).
>
>I think one of the "beauties" of XMCA that we do not institutionalize "full
>participation" and "full participants" (do we?). Some xmca people can be
>irritated by the length, frequency, the content, or a lack of messages of
>some other xmca participants. But it is still private irritation, not xmca
>institutional or communal. Waste for ones is food for others. We all are
>newcomers.
>
>Let's keep it that way. What do you think?
>
>Eugene
>
>Eva writes:
>>So you are quite right: the entrance ritual doesn't really fit the
>>setting,
>>as our practices in the informal settings serving as templates for this
>>collaborative projection are NOT to step in through the doorway,
>>interrupting the conversations by shouting out our CV and errand.
>>"Embarrassment" is the effect of a mismatch between a requested
>>behaviour
>>and expectations projected by the setting.
>
>-----------------------------------------------
>Eugene Matusov
>Willard Hall Educational Bldg., Room 206G
>Department of Educational Studies
>University of Delaware
>Newark, DE 19716-2920
>
>Phone: (302) 831-1266
>Fax: (302) 831-4445
>e-mail: ematusov who-is-at udel.edu
>http://www.ematusov.com
>------------------------------------------------
>
>
>

Judith Diamondstone
* NOTE CHANGE OF AREA CODE * (732) 932-7496 Ext. 352
MAILING ADDRESS:
Graduate School of Education
Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey
10 Seminary Place
New Brunswick, NJ 08901-1183
* NOTE CHANGE OF ZIP CODE *