Re: Unidentified subject!

From: Mike Cole (lchcmike@gmail.com)
Date: Sat Dec 04 2004 - 21:58:29 PST


Phil-- Why don't you and Diane do a duet? Most any way of beginning
the process of
distributed collective self-maintenance of the discussions seems like
a healthy move to me.
mike

On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 06:38:42 +0700, phil_chappell@access.inet.co.th
<phil_chappell@access.inet.co.th> wrote:
> If Diane is interested, I'm happy to let her take the lead on this one;
> otherwise, after I recover from an important presentation on Tuesday and a
> flight back from Sydney to Bangkok, I'm happy to be the (yuletide) shepherd;-)
>
> Phil
>
> Is that an offer to shepard the Peirce discussion, Diane?
> As you know, no prior experience in the topic is required,, just a
> crooked stick and
> a good humor.
> mike
>
> On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 01:13:16 -0500, Bramble House <info@bramblehouse.net> wrote:
> > What is interesting, about this idea of 'shepherding discussions,'
> > is what can happen when dissension effects a discussion.
> >
> > Huh.
> > Cool. And I'm impressed with the way y'all are dealing with it.
> >
> > Thanks.
> > Cheers.
> > Meh.
> > diane
> >
> >
> >
> > ---- Original Message -----
> > From: "Mike Cole" <lchcmike@gmail.com>
> > To: <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
> > Cc: <philchappell@mac.com>
> > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 12:53 AM
> > Subject: Re: Shepherding discussions
> >
> > > One good delay deserves another, Phil.
> > > We have closed the polls on the article form MCA for discussion . I
> > > will be the one on
> > > Peirce. It is supposed to be made available by Erlbaum next week. Might
> > you lead
> > > this discussion in order to start us of on distribued stewardship? I
> > > think that the volunteer shepards will appear only by example.
> > >
> > > There are a lot of other articles and issues that people want to read.
> > > Helene W has
> > > gotten us to Yrjo's "Values, Rubbish and Work Place" paper as one
> > > example,. Perhaps someone else (Helene) will lead that discussion?
> > >
> > > Meantime, we enter finals week and I am completing a multiu-week
> > > discussion with
> > > colleagues and students in Santiago about culture and development. We
> > > finish next
> > > Thursday.
> > >
> > > So much to learn, so few volunteers to help! :-)
> > > mike
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:20:53 +0700, phil_chappell@access.inet.co.th
> > > <phil_chappell@access.inet.co.th> wrote:
> > > > Mike and Bill,
> > > >
> > > > I've just got back to email mode after drifting around for a couple of
> > weeks,
> > > > computer-free (thanks in part to a bad Apple). Mike, I think your
> > suggestion of
> > > > having thread-shepherds is great, given, as you say, the success on the
> > CHAT
> > > > course all those months back. The shepherd could ensure disussions stay
> > on
> > > > track and shepherd straying topics to new threads, hopefully without
> > leaving
> > > > any belly-up (I've never seen a sheep belly-up). The interventions like
> > > > Michael's into Bill's thread are naturally important but might be better
> > in
> > > > another, parallel pen.
> > > >
> > > > For many, I think, discussions zoom along at such a rapid pace and take
> > > > unexpected left or right turns that to join in is almost like jumping
> > onto the
> > > > race track while all the cars are looming in on you. For instance, I've
> > just
> > > > spent a half-hour or so looking at old discussions of "history" in CHAT,
> > and
> > > > found it quite difficult to find any substantial discourse on this hoary
> > old
> > > > issue.
> > > >
> > > > My two-bob's worth.
> > > >
> > > > Phil Chappell
> > > >
> > > > ______________________________________________________
> > > > Mike wrote a couple of weeks ago:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks Bill-- Apropos of phil's analysis I did not read far enough
> > > > down the note.
> > > >
> > > > What changes in xmca culture might mitigate the obvious problems
> > > > without being likely to cause new problems. For example, I, too,
> > > > thought the issue of cultural historical analysis
> > > > important for my reasons, probably different that Phil's or Michael's,
> > > > but personally pressing, but could think of no way to overlap my
> > > > interests and other competing one's to do any follow up.
> > > >
> > > > Is there any change at all that creating something like a volunteer
> > > > committee to shepard along different discussions acknoweldged as
> > > > important might work? Anyone who really cares to see a particular
> > > > thread pursued could work on that thread which might or might not
> > > > propsper, but at least would not die a sudden death for no sponsor
> > > > willing to put in, say, a week or so, seeing if it gathered attention,
> > > > and different people could
> > > > simultaneously participate and lurk as their proclivities led them to.
> > > >
> > > > Having the reminder of Eva's work appear and reappear, even as we miss
> > > > her online presence, is one gift of the discourse.
> > > > mike
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using Inet-Webmail.
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jan 01 2005 - 01:00:04 PST