> First, the form of open distribution list with weak moderation that
>XLCHC and its side-lists offer, is inherently unstable. It is prone to
>sudden bursts of exchange or protracted silence. The dynamics is much more
>externally governed (by the rhythm of the academic year and conferencing)
>than it is determined by the content of the dicussion threads or by
>reaching a kind of consensus. This is most obvious for old outsiders like
>me having a different background rhythm; for newcomers it is one of the
>most frustrating properties of open lists.
I find Arne's posting exciting, with ecological considerations of electronic=
discussions illuminating of what Eva and I have been working on/playing=
with, and recognizing the same bursts in mailflow that we have been trying=
to understand. I wish I had been around when he was.
Arne's message is particularly relevant today as Luiz has raised the specter=
of information processing. I'd like to address the issues of=
computational metaphor and information processing, in that the first does=
not necessitate the second. In the case of the computational model of xmca=
population behavior that appears in my latest paper, I have been exploring=
the regulation of list postings by the expenditure of labor in a system of=
readers and writers. As a model it is a little more complex than Yrj=F6's=
triangles, and some of the 'thinking' with the model is offloaded onto the=
machine (interestingly combined with the 'thinking' of the MIT minds who=
created the modeling program, also materialized in the machine, and,=
progressing into the past, the others through history who have contributed=
to the development of that computational system...). =20
As a computational metaphor, the model explores the consequences of our=
communicating with each other having to pass through the working of our=
fingers on the key board -- the actions and operations of the physical=
labor of reading and writing. The model is certainly not equivalent to=
saying that people are like computers or that people are just sites for=
embodied time. It is a tool for understanding how the flow of time,=
together with the labor of multilogue, regulates our communications. So=
we find the model can reproduce the bursts of exchange that share the same=
mathematical patterns as does the real list. I find this surprising and=
energizing, and become intensely curious about why it behaves like our xmca=
population does, when I know there are so many differences between the two.
I wonder if Luiz' message is indicative of the recognition of unfavorable=
sentiment towards quantitative studies and computation. In all honesty, I=
felt this concern, and it made me hesitate to link my paper to the xmca=
page, and it has also driven discussion in the paper towards the=
affordances of the model and modeling, the minimization of technical=
content through thumbnailed graphs, links that pushed that content off=
into other windows, and links to introductory material on the web. Like=
Arne of 1993, I have been concerned about the flare ups on this list=
lately, that appear more as swarms of sentiment -- a reactive nature --=
than of a synergistic reflective nature. Mind you, I have remembered back=
to times when I have reacted and other time's when I have caught myself=
wanting to do so, and I am not casting any stones.
Like Arne's second message, I find that it is a sunny day, and I'll stop=
here so that the weather can be better appreciated. I also just had a=
great chocolate, organic, whole milk and it is inviting me to nap.
Bill Barowy, Associate Professor
Lesley College, 31 Everett Street, Cambridge, MA 02138-2790=20
Phone: 617-349-8168 / Fax: 617-349-8169
http://www.lesley.edu/faculty/wbarowy/Barowy.html
_______________________
"One of life's quiet excitements is to stand somewhat apart from yourself
and watch yourself softly become the author of something beautiful."
[Norman Maclean in "A river runs through it."]