yak
[Top] [All Lists]

[yak@collab] Re: What are we trying to accomplish?

To: yak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "Albert Selvin" <albert_selvin@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 23:52:50 +0000
Message-id: <LAW9-F116pLkTgbLYlu00010f51@hotmail.com>
A belated reply to Murray's post below (excerpted).    (01)

I acknowledge that I will miss things of value by deleting without reading. 
By the way, I didn't mean to cast any aspersions on particular threads; I 
just chose some recent examples.    (02)

The problem I (and all of us, really) have is overload. I can't read 
everything, and personally seldom read longer email posts to groups unless 
they happen to squarely target an interest of mine. I (also personally) find 
it difficult to absorb topics that move in the direction of abstractions via 
email. At the risk of sounding pejorative, I find them easy to write but 
hard to read.    (03)

So when I see repeated topics, especially ones with names that *appear* to 
be abstract, I tend to tune out in the interest of saving 
time/attention/energy for posts that are more targeted and easier for me to 
absorb.    (04)

I'm not trying to claim any virtue for this position. I just provided it as 
a data point to the discussion of how to organize the discourse on the list. 
Maybe I have an un-thought-out position on this, actually, about what types 
of discourse work best in email lists, but I certainly haven't thought about 
it enough to make any kind of general statement.    (05)

Best,    (06)

Al    (07)

>From: Murray Altheim <m.altheim@open.ac.uk>
>Reply-To: yak@collab.blueoxen.net
>To: yak@collab.blueoxen.net
>Subject: [yak@collab] Re: What are we trying to accomplish?
>Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 19:47:41 +0000    (08)


>Al,
>
>I understand your point, and I do think the risk is high.
>
>I'd disagree with Eugene about chatter, at least insofar    (09)

- snip -    (010)

>I'm just wary of having any specific conversation characterized
>as "chatter". It's a dangerous precedent, both for the writers    (011)

- snip -    (012)

>(and conversants). If we had a technology that allowed us to
>track multiple subjects as they arose within multiple threads,
>e.g., where it was possible to see that within "fundamentalism"
>we were also talking about technology development, community
>usage, whatever, that would be a boon.
>
>Murray
>    (013)

_________________________________________________________________
Check out the coupons and bargains on MSN Offers! 
http://shopping.msn.com/softcontent/softcontent.aspx?scmId=1418    (014)

-- 
This message is archived at:    (015)

http://collab.blueoxen.net/forums/cgi-bin/mesg.cgi?a=yak&i=LAW9-F116pLkTgbLYlu00010f51@hotmail.com    (016)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>