Kathryn writes:
>I am responding to Paul's message to Bill, and I notice a kind of funny
>( as in strange funny, posssibly ironic "yikes"" funny") reversal in the
>claim that only 4- 6 people contributed about 90% of the recent
>discussion.. I need only sort my "in box " in the last few months on
>this list to see how few voices have dominated the xcma-list - prior
>to
>the 'reflexive" break and call for in house retrospection on modes of
>address and respect.
i have appreciated the "new" voices and the variety of stances taken
toward (and away from) the recent discussion on the meta-level of xmca
communication.
it's not the usual type of conversation, it's not all been smooth and
predictable, but i have found it valuable.
it remains to be seen if we can carry our awareness, concerns and respect
for one another into the next thread, the march readings, or wherever we
go.
there may yet be more funny reversals.
kathie
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
.........Our words misunderstand us..............................
.....We are our words, and black and bruised and blue.
Under our skins, we're laughing....................................
.........................Adrienne Rich..................................
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Katherine_Goff@ceo.cudenver.edu
http://ceo.cudenver.edu/~katherine_goff/index.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 07 2000 - 17:54:15 PST