o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

Mike & All,

Yes, it's good to have a list of precepts and pointers somewhere,
but it needs to be understood that those are literally pointers
to a larger social context from which they draw their only real
validity.  The idea that the X-site community is somehow exempt
from the norms of the outside world and will henceforth proceed
to rebuild from scratch is the very thing that led Wikipedia
down the road to a bad rerun of the ''Lord of the Flies''.

I don't think that this is due to the text-only medium,
as I have never communicated with journal editors and
even many conference referees, before the conference,
in any other way.

It has to do with a pervading air that the WP management put on,
constantly inciting novices to BE BOLD !!! and persist in their
ignorant rants, when they should have been encouraged to learn.

Jon Awbrey

Mike Johnson wrote:
> 
> Jon,
> 
> I think you make a very good point that there exist traditional avenues
> for dispute resolution between scholars.
> 
> The issue I see is that scholarly norms and instincts may occasionally
> malfunction in a novel, text-only social context, so it'd be nice to
> have a resolution policy to fall back on.
> 
> I'm reminded of the this article exploring how frequently (text-only) emails
> are misunderstood:  http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0515/p13s01-stct.html
> 
> Mike Johnson

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
inquiry e-lab: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
http://www.textop.org/wiki/index.php?title=User:Jon_Awbrey
wikinfo: http://wikinfo.org/wiki.php?title=User:Jon_Awbrey
wp review: http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showuser=398
zendium: http://textop.org/smf/index.php?action=profile;u=19
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

_______________________________________________
Citizendium-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.purdue.edu/mailman/listinfo/citizendium-l

Reply via email to