[Sigia-l] Anyone suggest a better global list?

[Susan Doran]

Hi

Of all I wrote, it's too bad to some it boiled down to comments about Ziya--which was a fraction of what I wrote. Shoot! :)

To be clear: I wasn't blaming or dwelling, and I'm not digging through archives to defend myself; I was naming what I experienced, as apparently others did.  True: some were comfortable at a time when I was not.  Ostensibly, those who were comfortable did not leave; but this thread is, in part, why people left.

Many other points were made about what led to my leaving--and possibly others, given what has been said here. Some conjecture but mostly based on typical patterns in group dynamics, community formation and dissolution.

I can understand some people's discomfort with reflection---and the desire just to keep moving forward.

But part of what many of us do for a living is exercise the ability to reflect, assess what works and what doesn't, in order to understand past and current conditions to improve them moving forward.

I understand impatience with discussion of "tone in disagreements." However, if the community finds it useful to define what's healthiest and most sustainable in how we address each other in this community, then it's a valid discussion point.  

So, I respect discomfort with this conversation---and am not proposing a huge meta-discussion---but alas, sometimes they're needed.  The point at which someone asks where's there's a better list, cuz nothing's happening here, seems an ideal time for a meta-discussion. 

If this group were a more cohesive "community," perhaps we'd decide on some parameters for discussion, goals, length, and some ground rules--then get 'er done and move on. 

That's probably not where we're at as a group, tho; so I'll continue in this post--and if you don't wish to read, or your response is to rail, you can move along. 

To me, the question isn't whether to argue vs not argue.  As most of us know from conversations "around the table" with clients, customers, coworkers, it's about how to disagree and address conflict productively, with collegiality and respect.

If some people's arguing style is abrasive and disrespectful, it's not incumbent upon anyone else to suck it up---unless they're in a position of power, and in an online discussion group we're all equal, and no one has more power than anyone else (except the moderator).  Generally people do not just suck it up if someone is abrasive and disrespectful around "the table." 

Some may see politeness and nuance as being "wimpy" or unnecessarily "indirect," but most of us see it differently---a necessary condition for collaboration, trust-building, connecting, and mindful decision making.  Not to mention professional community building. 

Some people are comfortable with going straight at each other---I find this most often the case working with Dev folks, where that's often part of the communications style and culture--and often imbue that style with traits such as "honesty" and "straightforwardness." While those they're talking at--not similarly inculturated--experience it as [at an extreme] rather brutal, or brutish, and rude.  Most people here, I think, would agree that without knowing each other, or in the absence of having offline relationships (or long-term online relationships). it makes sense to proceed in communications erring on the side of carefulness/respectfulness.
_____________________

So I've said what I wanted to say.  As a list/community member, I'd encourage anyone to talk about what they want to--and not to be intimidated by loud voices. If you want to talk about your experience with this list, I'm sure it would be interesting to (1) ASIS&T, (2) those of us who think about what makes communities work and break, and (3) other members of the list who might have had similar, and different, experiences.  And if we're collectively done with this discussion, then so be it.

Meanwhile, I'll be thinking of an actual question to post on---and will see about responding to some of the other topical posts :)

best
Susan

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Susan Doran
521 Central Ave Apt 3
San Francisco CA 94117
202-296-4849
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 11:23:30 +0000
> From: paola at limov.com
> To: sigia-l at asis.org
> Subject: Re: [Sigia-l] Anyone suggest a better global list?
> 
> I wonder if I have been reading the same list as those who have
> posted about Ziya.
> 
> I've been on the Internet since 1988 and know all too well how
> some people disrupt newsgroups, mailing lists or chat rooms just
> for fun; we called them flamers, trolls or (on Second Life)
> griefers. To compare Ziya to these kinds of people does him a
> great disservice.
> 
> I, for one, valued Ziya's posts. I found him interesting and
> entertaining - sure, sometimes garrulous - but NEVER a flamer
> nor a troll.
> 
> I'm sorry that people left the list because of him. But I, for one,
> liked the active list with him better than a near-dead one without.
> 
> There are probably PhDs on how individuals can affect Internet
> groups; nothing can be achieved by discussing the issue here
> further rather than undermining the emergence of IA discussion.
> 
> I therefore respectfully request that the list isn't used any
> more to discuss or blame individuals for the list's health
> because it's not relevant to IA; please take it off-list.
> 
> 
> Paola
> --
> http://www.paolability.com
> 
> ------------
> 2011  IA Summit
> March 30 - April 3, 2011
> Pre Conference Seminars: March 30-31
> IA Summit: April 1-3
> Hyatt Regency Convention Center
> Denver, CO 
> -----
> When replying, please *trim your post* as much as possible.
> *Plain text, please; NO Attachments
> 
> Searchable Archive at 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