[Sigia-l] The Menace

[Ken Bryson]

the 'booksellers' and 'bureaucracy-creators' conspiracy theory
notwithstanding, it does seem peculiar that the same set of individuals who
brought us boxes and arrows, acia, info-arch.org, etc, now seem to think we
need some umbrella organization with a particulary californian name (and
crappy acronym, not to mention type-treatment) meant to speak for IA
practitioners everywhere???

do they all live on the same block in Asilomar, CA or something?

I realise there's more to IA than the particular "information science" slant
that affiliation with asis&t would engender, but what's the real use of
creating a new "institute" that as far as I can tell is more of a club than
an "institute".  also, if we'd just take the time to support one of the
afformentioned attempts at instituting a IA community, perhaps we wouldn't
waste our time re-inventing the communal wheel.

-kb


> -----Original Message-----
> From: sigia-l-admin at asis.org
> [mailto:sigia-l-admin at asis.org]On Behalf Of
> Derek R
> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 4:11 PM
> To: sigia-l at asis.org
> Subject: Re: [Sigia-l] The Menace
>
>
>
> >| I know everyone is thinking it, but apparently
> >| I'm the only one brave enough to ask:
> >|
> >| What is the @#!!$#@! AIfIA doing
>
>
> Well, now. A human stepping-out of sheep's clothing, Chris? This is a
> first.
>
> Now, the smart-people should be aware the newly announced
> AlFIA (btw - a
> lousy all-around presentation) is nothing more than the same old
> tired-clique of brain-dead book-sellers and conference vamps.
>
> > Why do I say this, you ask?
>
> Well, because this *is* what has been presented to us:
>
> For instance,
>
> 1) These 'book-sellers' and 'bureaucracy-creators' have no interest in
> promoting the greater field of IA (their self-interest being to sell,
> sell, sell, books and self-promoting bureaucracy) just as they have no
> interest in moving the discipline forward, collectively. Clearly the
> activity of self-promotion being in conflict with collective
> interests.
>
> 2) These 'booksellers' and 'bureaucracy-creators' want you to believe
> that moving them forward *as individuals* is the best way to move you
> forward with them. (i.e. buy my lousy book, join my organization -- ha
> ha suckers! [Homer's voice])
>
> Indeed, some of these people can't even put enough material
> together to
> call it a book/organization, but will certainly still try to
> sell it to
> you . . . .
>
> As it is, the greater IA community (you and me) is nothing
> more to these
> vultures than 'a market' in which commodities can be sold and branding
> can take place. In short, the IA community is being used for
> individual
> gain. We are being sent spam in the form of good intentions.
> You cannot
> dispute these observable facts.
>
>
> IF the newly announced AlFIA, and its core members, were opposed to
> movement based solely on their own individual gain (instead favoring
> collective direction) -- they would be:
>
> a) open to intelligent discussion regarding their own core theses, and
> not deferred to hiding from any and all criticism by any
> means necessary
> and
>
> b) they would have corresponded with this list (SIGIA) regarding their
> plans to create a 'voice' or organization for all practitioners of IA.
>
> The absence of these things not only suggests, but proves,
> these people
> operate within a personal agenda, thumbing their nose at any who would
> speak the truth for the benefit of all.
>
>
> With this in mind I would dispute, for instance, the wisdom of
> statements like this one (the main thesis of the quoted book):
>
> <quote "Elements of User Experience">
> The user experience development process is all about ensuring that no
> aspect of the user's experience with your site happens without your
> conscious, explicit intent. This means taking into account every
> possibility of every action the user is likely to take and
> understanding
> the user's expectations at every step of the way through that process.
> </quote "Elements of User Experience">
>
> This is so *ridiculous* who could be fooled into believing
> it? Desperate
> people, sheep, and who else? What kind of world exists where nothing
> 'happens' without "conscious, explicit intent" by some over-seeing
> dictator? Clearly, this is unattainable and ridiculous as is
> the rest of
> the book building from this ill-conceived thesis. [I would be happy to
> discuss this on SIGIA.]
>
> One does not need to look further than the wisdom of
> companies claiming
> to be involved in IA, (ie, http://adaptivepath.com/ ), but which,
> despite the company name, observably have not considered the user by
> using a *fixed-font (non-adaptive)* environment. How can one not
> recognize the fraud unless they (like sheep) are not looking?
>
> Again, I also point to the ridiculous notion of *findability,* whose
> author, again, hides away not willing to openly discuss what is
> observably a bad idea, despite this obviousness being clearly pointed
> out. [Let's discuss on SIGIA!]
>
> Many people continually fall for these 'bad ideas' and 'poor
> leadership'
> (like sheep) allowing these 'booksellers' and
> 'bureaucracy-creators' to
> take credit for everything-under-the-sun, apparently truly
> believing the
> promotion of a single or tiny group of individuals (and consequently
> those individual's blatantly inaccurate, and flat-out wrong
> material) in
> the form of books or conferences or web companies will benefit the
> interests of the entire IA community/society.
>
> These people clearly are ignorant of what the word 'society' means in
> action and reference, being only concerned with themselves
> and how they
> can *up-sell* to you (the suckers) by endorsing each other.
>
> In lieu of real insight from these people (which hasn't
> arrived) I would
> characterize them as fraudulent, and indicate -- correctly and
> observably -- that their sole interest lies in
> *self-promotion* and not
> in the interests of the discipline of IA -- otherwise they would
> practice-what-they-preach and open themselves up to public scrutiny
> (this means you can't hide behind your own, or your clique-friends,
> blogs).
>
> If anyone wishes to dispute these well-known and observable facts --
> here I am -- waiting for rebuttal on the American *Society* of
> Information Science and Technology Special Interest Group on
> Information
> Architecture email List .
>
> Your continued silence and retreat, like vamps from sunlight,
> is further
> evidence of your unattainable position.
>
> Best Wishes for some Sanity in this Field dominated by vamps,
>
> Derek R
> http://derekrogerson.com
>
>
>
>
> ------------
> When replying, please *trim your post* as much as possible.
> *Plain text, please; NO Attachments
>
> ASIST Annual Meeting:
> http://www.asis.org/Conferences/AM02/index.html
>
> ASIST SIG IA website: http://www.asis.org/SIG/SIGIA/index.html
> Searchable list archive:   http://www.info-arch.org/lists/sigia-l/
> ________________________________________
> Sigia-l mailing list -- post to: Sigia-l at asis.org
> Changes to subscription: http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigia-l
>