Re: [xmca] Access to articles and discussion

My humble suggestion is this:

that those of you more experienced and comfortable with the XMCA
discussion forum keep vigilant watch for new voices whenever they do
emerge and then respond. Use the response also as a space for your
own assertion, to be sure(perhaps one you would have made anyway),
but even the notation of "re:" as the slightest acknowledgment of
that new voice is alluring and validating. Any thoughtful response
will do - but in my opinion, better if it is not only "sweet",
encouraging or gentle but rather truly responsive and generative. In
my own novice experience, intimidation is linked to a feeling of
irrelevance which comes with the frayed edges of a thread that is not
continued in some way or another. As Andy suggests, workload is
always an issue of course, but I do understand that there are ways
that participation in the parlance of this forum can actually
decrease workload by creatively and expeditiously negotiating ideas
or problems central to the work each of us has in front of us.

For instance I am in heat of writing a grant proposal that I hope
will lead to a multi-year post-doc position that will allow me to
expand the work I am already involved with at the Center for
Adaptive Optics ( electro-engineering, astronomy and optometry
research center with a strong education component). I can imagine
exploring more powerful ways to shape the structure of that work
through conversations here that are also linked to the more central
debates at hand.

Tamara

On Nov 30, 2008, at 5:40 PM, Andy Blunden wrote:
> Well I'm not one of those who vote and don't discuss but I am
> willing to have a guess at issues here, and maybe people will be
> provoked into correcting me?
>
> I have had brief discussions with several people either offline or
> via FaceBook who have expressed an interest in xmca discussions but
> say (basically) they are not clever enough to contribute. Having
> been assured that this is absolutely not the case, they later go on
> to become contributors. For some, it is that fear of speaking up
> and maybe getting their heads bitten off. In other cases, I am
> sure, it is a simple matter of the insanity of academic workloads
> already driving people to the edge.
>
> I have racked my brain and failed to come up with a viable means of
> resolving this, other than being civil and respectful in
> discussions. When I asked about Bobath, someone who had never
> spoken before spoke up saying "At last something I feel qualified
> to speak on." Likewise, when I asked for help for my brother with
> his daughter's maths problems, loads of really helpful and
> knowledgeable people spoke up. But the general debate, people seem
> to find intimidating. And yet, in my experience, unjustifiably so.
>
> Andy
>
> Mike Cole wrote:
>> I fear that at present the article to be made available free for
>> discussion
>> at Taylor and Francis
>> has not been released. The ever-lengthening duration of
>> Thanksgiving holiday
>> has probably not
>> helped matters. Consequently, many, probabaly most, members of
>> xmca do not
>> have access to the
>> article in question by Stetsenko and Sawchuk. We are working on it.
>> The issue of discussion of article in MCA that are not made
>> available free
>> is even more difficult and we
>> are working on that too. We have a situation where often two or more
>> articles are ones that people want
>> to discuss but we are unlikely to get T&F to offer the journal for
>> free. So
>> we are discussing with them
>> the cost of electronic versions so that acces to people without the
>> financial means to get access can
>> be handled in a viable way.
>> Simultaneously, I would not that more than 30 people voted to
>> discuss the
>> Sanino article, but to date, very
>> few people have availed themselves of the opportunity they
>> obtained for the
>> group by their votes. I take
>> this to be a problem and would appreciate suggestions for making
>> XMCA a more
>> multi-voiced forum for
>> discussion. Might the overwhelming majority of people who voted for
>> discussion of this article but who have
>> failed to comment on it help me and others understand what is a
>> foot. Is it
>> amplification or amputation, perhaps some productive
>> transformation, that is
>> required
>> The academic semester/quarter draws to a close in the United
>> States. The
>> stock market is open in Asia. The people of Mumbai, Peshewar, Ramadi,
>> Eastern Congo, flood raviged Brazil and elsewhere bury their dead.
>> The polar
>> bears, I hear, are enjoying a cool winter, but word is sparse from
>> that part
>> of the world. The future beckons. What is that she is holding in
>> her hand?
>> Or is it behind our backs?
>> mike
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmca mailing list
>> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> Andy Blunden http://home.mira.net/~andy/ +61 3 9380 9435 Skype
> andy.blunden
> Hegel's Logic with a Foreword by Andy Blunden:
> http://www.marxists.org/admin/books/index.htm
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
Received on Mon Dec 1 10:25:42 2008