I had hoped, selfishly, to learn something from having been exposed to
Paul's offline thoughts to Andy. I suppose I have learned that there are
public/private thoughts to manage, in any social context, and manage with
civility. But I had hoped to understand more about the IDEAS behind why Paul
thought Mike was hesitating on the September read --- a bit about the
different perspectives here on the xmca, rather than a bunch about defending
the right to have different perspectives (about which there seems to be no
quarrel.)
Anyway, I appreciate Bill's tenacity at keeping the issue alive long enough
for Paul to respond publicly, because it did feel like an awkward drop in
the conversation over the weekend.
And, although I agree with Bill and Katherine that there is much to
understand by considering the history leading to any act, I am happily
reminded by Helena's last post that the issue of the unit of analysis is
"person/people, communication tool, purpose" and that Paul's offline/online
comment was just shared for different purposes among all of us people who
witnessed it and the follow up comments over the last few days. A learning
opportunity.
I expect I will find that other learning opportunity (about the ideas behind
Paul's public/private message) in the discussion to come, soon with
September's reading.
Elizabeth
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 01 2000 - 01:00:55 PDT