vision2020
Re: proposed changes to list
>
>Maybe I've got the wrong idea about what this list might be...I have been
>hoping for a forum for people to test-ride their ideas with the benefit of
>hearing from thoughtful people if there are more merits than problems with a
>new way of looking at a local problem...but
>
>I see two problems with the list working this way with even the
>re-configurations suggested. One problem is that for responsible postings it
>seems that we need to do away with anonominity, asking for personal
>accountability by requiring a real name. Fine, by itself, but we are also,
>through our archives, making all comments permanent and public. In a
>conversation, people advance opinions, react to opinions offerd, and modify
>their own stand. After some conversation, most no longer would stand my the
>original opinion advanced without some modification.
>
>Any of my half-baked ideas which I would hope to refine through dialog on the
>list now appear as permanent and public record of "my opinion". I'm simply
>not brave enough for this public history of the evolution of my thinking on
>any particular topic.
>
>I stated when we considered the invitation to archive our correspondence that
>I felt it would inhibit commentary. I have certainly found that it has
>inhibited me in contributing to the list. At the time, the comment was made
>that it was foolish to think that any electronic correspondence was private or
>as ephemeral as the spoken word. I would certainly agree, but I still feel
>considerably less exposed in a conversation on a listserv to which one must
>subscribe in order to read, than on a web-page readable by anyone, anywhere.
>
>I am for eliminating the archives and requiring subscription to the list in
>order to post to it, or to read it. There is something to be said for the
>committment one makes to a list when one agrees to wade through all the
>message headings that show up in one's mailbox (!). I also think there is a
>certain hubris in thinking that what is posted on Vision2020 is so important
>that it deserves to be read by everyone or anyone.
>
>I have patiently waded through all the messages posted here for the past
>several years, and commented only when I felt I might add something to the
>discussion. I also felt that other readers of the list would extend the same
>courtesy. But with so many of the good conversations apparently continuing as
>"private conversations", the spam, and the lack of "privacy" through archiving
>messages, I'm feeling a little frustrated.
>
>I truly believe that archiving messages on a publicly accessible web-site is a
>big source of the problems this list is having right now.
>
>Gens Johnson
Back to TOC