[Sigia-l] The Menace

[Derek R]

> Not a single person involved in AIfIA is making any money from this.

I never claimed you are or would, only that this is your intent. That
is, to cull 30 bucks or whatever for your own individual purposes, your
Board of Directors and Leadership Council being observable members of a
clique.

Can you deny the whole purpose of AIfIA now is to solicit money?

At any rate, it would not be difficult to suspect members dues would be
used to promote the book "Information Architecture for the World Wide
Web, II" or other such books, these books you, yourselves, have deemed
important independent of the larger community -- a larger community you
take pains to reject and exclude as further evidenced by your choice of
Board members and Leadership Council. These facts are not in dispute. We
are aware of your lack of impartiality.

I further think it is clear to all your purpose is to exert influence
which will promote your position as individuals over the interests of
the whole community which you falsely claim to represent. (i.e. "Hi, I'm
the president of such-n-such! I speak for everybody, and only my opinion
matters! he, he, he . . ." [Homer's laugh])

Stop lying to people.

If you want to have an organization -- go ahead. But please don't
pretend your organization has the interest and support of the entire IA
community in mind when clearly, and observable, you do not -- the jury
being fixed, composed of a few conference/book vamps, and no else being
consulted. Your root misconception may just lay in falsely observing Lou
Rosenfeld as 'the entire IA community,' simply because he stole the term
and concept of IA from somebody else.


>| I'm not sure why you are calling us "vultures" 
>| motivated strictly by self-interest.

Try reading the post again, slower this time, so you don't miss
anything.


>>| b) they would have corresponded with this list (SIGIA) regarding
their
>>| plans to create a 'voice' or organization for all practitioners of
IA.
>|
>| We had very serious debates about this. We were concerned that the
>| initiative would be perceived this way by some, though hopefully not
>| all.

Since you didn't correspond with this list at all, how is it 'some'
would perceive this non-correspondence as correspondence? Again, you are
unable to see beyond your own clique, believing those who do not
intimately follow the movements of your clique are not IAs and have no
business in IA. You are wrong.


> If we announced out intentions we believed we would
> never get to first base

Here you admit to individual and personal intentions outside of the
larger community. To suggest that asking the community (the one you
claim to represent) what their intentions are is a *bad idea* is, well,
the definition of 'clique.' Read it and weep. You don't own me, even if
you think you do.


> You raise a pile of other points, which others can address in detail

They haven't address them at all in the past, so, I would expect further
cowardly head-ducking in the future.


>| We do want to be open to dialogue and discussion.
>| I'm not sure why you perceive as being unwilling to do this.

If you can't connect-the-dots on the 'clique' issue -- and how you
created an organization which speaks for the entire IA community without
even consulting it -- as *opposed* to 'open,' than I would point to that
behavior as further evidence of itself.


> You criticize the theses as posted to aifia.org

I didn't criticize anything specifically stated by aifia.org (only its
non-statements, non-collaboration). [You don't listen/read very well do
you, Karl?] I criticized theses championed by its core members
concerning the discipline of IA. I could criticize the entire aifia.org
site for you, but that would be as boring as it is obvious. The point
being that if the core members are way-off-track in philosophy and
practice, the same can be expected, and observable so, from the
organization itself.


>| You criticize Adaptive Path, but they are a company that does IA
>| work. They are not AIfIA. Nor are they IA. What are you criticizing?

Adaptive Path is "a company that does IA work...They are not...IA?" That
makes no sense Karl. How can one do IA work but not be IA related? I
could make further light of this flawed thinking and connect it to your
organization (as you are a core member), but, hey... what is
observable...


>| You criticize Peter's notion of findability and his unwillingness
>| to openly discuss it. First, I know Peter well and think he is 
>| very willing to discuss it

Here I am. [pause]  I have even spoke at his home-turf at Semantic
Studios. He won't come out to play.


>| I thought you were criticizing AIfIA the organization, not an 
>| idea from one of its founders. How does this relate to AIfIA?

Again, Karl, if you cannot connect-the-dots between the views of a
founder on topic 'X,' the founding organization being solely devoted to
topic 'X,' and all core members being apart of a clique (ie. they
operate within their own personal beliefs), then you need to go back to
grade-school. I cannot help you further.


> I never thought I would see such bile regarding our efforts.

Of course you didn't. You expected everyone to shut-up and fall-in-line
-- as has been the case since I joined this list nearly one year ago. In
short, you are unprepared and now crying about will not help -- address
the issues of your cabal and its related organizations, or cower away,
and hide.


____________________________________

"What is in darkness, must come out to light."