You write:
"when I look at the patterns of participation I am always reminded that
there's a lot of silence in this
conversation -- and I am convinced that this is not
just the silence of participants who are ...
just too busy to even read the mail they're
receiving ... or the silence due to lack of time for
writing ..."
And I'd like to consider time a little more.
My participation on xmca is coaxed out of a killer
schedule. For two years (1997 to 1999) I actually
gave up. The problem is not just that I have no
time to read too much email; I don't have time
to read. At this point in my life I don't worry
that someone will come along and say something along
the lines of, 'this idea you just posted, I read it
in so&so, how could you have missed it?' I do worry
about considering someone's ideas thoughtfully.
I often want to read some of the other texts I find
referred to in various venues. I want to catch up
on some of those Russians I put off ten+ years ago
(_The subjective object. The objective subject._
is a title I noticed in 1987, and I'm still
intrigued.) so I can understand AT a little better.
I suspect I'm hardly alone. I also suspect that
the distribution of available time & committments
cuts right to privileges & entitlements. I have
what I jokingly refer to as a 'day job' as a
bureaucrat. It comes with many advantages, but not
the advantage of time set aside for study. Teachers
on this list have a similarly time consuming day job.
In the USA, assistant professors sometimes assume
all kinds of 'day jobs' (committee work, chairs of
events, administrative responsibilities) that eat
away their time.
And in the end, I suppose it'll be easier to infuse
a little more safety into xmca discourse practices
than time into my life ...
oh well, dinner's waiting, Genevieve
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com