[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines

Yay for absentee voters and phone bankers in San Diego!

As I mentioned to Martin off-line, people currently in other countries might also try helping in this way: 
Can you text, call, or email friends (heck, even vague acquaintances) back in the states and help them stay on task about voting?  
Ask them about how it was when they voted or about the plan they have about when and where to vote?  
You might even be able to help counter false information about what ID people have to bring to the polls (and you or they can look up the real requirements on the Board of elections for the state or the state's secretary of State...)
Apparently, some folks in some countries are using less expensive local throw away phones to do this.
Since voter suppression is a big tactic this election, this independent phone/text/e-mail reach out might be a useful antidote (to say nothing of helping to counter the storm of massive scare ads which are depressing voters who haven’t been suppressed).
The phone bank I go to has been focusing on Florida the last few days. (In DC we have no voting representative in Congress, so we do what we can to get some folks elected who might help us change that -- I especially love supporting Mike's House of Representative candidates when they ask us to).  Many of the folks on the Florida list we have been calling really did like some friendly talk about getting to the polls and the number of Latino voters who are enthusiastic about early votes seems to have increased quite a bit in the last few days.  Today (Sunday) is the last early vote day in Florida so then they have to wait for Tuesday and go to their regular polling place (which some are a bit worried about).  Church to polls busses might kick in quite a few votes more in Florida today (and other states), and, by the way, last Friday, mosque to polls busses were active in some states.

Back to laundry and catching up on teaching students before more electioneering no too far from the polls.

-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Martin John Packer
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2016 1:01 AM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines

Can I suggest -- tactfully, with all due respect — that it is (as usual) Mike who has his priorities straight. Spending time just now, three days before the election, debating discourtesies here on the listserve when one could be helping to get out the vote is, it seems to me, rather like fiddling while Rome burns. That is to say, it is time wasted. If the election turns out badly, we will in a few years be looking back fondly on the good days of rude talk on xmca.  I currently live outside the US, but I’ve navigated the baroque requirements to file an absentee ballot. This election seems like it may perhaps be an important one. For life on this planet. 


> On Nov 5, 2016, at 10:38 PM, Christopher Schuck <schuckthemonkey@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's what I assumed, but then feared I might be mistaken. Thanks for 
> clarifying.
> I guess one other consideration is that I have actually been toying 
> with the idea of putting together some kind of presentation or paper 
> at a future conference that would center around challenges involved in 
> academic listserves, including gender dynamics and some of the other 
> things that have come up lately. Most likely I would focus on the 
> other discussion board I have been part of (Society for Theoretical 
> and Philosophical Psychology), but in truth the online participation 
> and dialogue here seems richer and I would love to draw upon XMCA as a 
> case study, maybe even promote dialogue between the two communities. 
> It's interesting to observe how these communities differ, and what 
> ends up generating the most heat on the listserve. For instance, over 
> there the question of how to discuss the election and how far we could 
> go in naming names and airing opinions, and what was appropriate for 
> psychologists to venture about candidates using psychological 
> language, became a huge saga with multiple installments, but over here 
> Mike shrugged and said, "Yeah, I suppose we shouldn't talk about X, but these are extraordinary times. Oh well." - and that was that.
> But, perhaps there are issues with venturing "outside," quoting 
> people, appropriating for a different context, etc....I have no 
> experience with this sort of thing. So, if anyone has done this before 
> or there are important considerations aside from obvious ones of basic 
> respect, accuracy, academic integrity, etc., feel free to weigh in. 
> All of this is very hypothetical at this point, anyway.
> Chris
> On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Alfredo Jornet Gil 
> <a.j.gil@iped.uio.no>
> wrote:
>> Hi Chris,
>> all posts are listed in a public domain, the xmca webpages. But, if 
>> am not wrong, a given post can be removed from them. Otherwise, posts 
>> go to the private mail boxes of each member of the list. I think most 
>> of the subscribers to xmca will be familiar to standards and codes 
>> for academic integrity in research, including respecting 
>> confidentiality. But I guess I should research bit more of this. Other more experienced voices?
>> Alfredo
>> ________________________________________
>> From: xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu 
>> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of mike cole 
>> <mcole@ucsd.edu>
>> Sent: 06 November 2016 03:51
>> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Privacy guidelines
>> Anything on this appears on google!
>> Mike
>> On Saturday, November 5, 2016, Christopher Schuck < 
>> schuckthemonkey@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> I just realized I named the academic institution of a member who 
>>> does *not *specifically have a link to their personal website on 
>>> XMCA; this was an oversight on
>> my
>>> part. If this constitutes a major violation of privacy, I'm so sorry!!
>>> Is there any formal code when it comes to mentioning details, 
>>> confidentiality, etc., that I should be aware of? I always assumed 
>>> that nothing posted on this list can be repeated elsewhere, but 
>>> since it's public maybe that's not true?
>>> Just wondering about the rules for privacy and confidentiality. 
>>> Again, I apologize if I erred.
>>> Chris

Status: O