All I would say is that online communities can be fragile. There are currently 127 people on the <ambit> list. Yet increasingly debate is restricted to a tiny minority. My experience from other lists is that when views become very polarised (as often happens in a time of conflict), the level of common interest in the community can seem to be reduced, leading people to question their continued involvement and support. I would ask that people bear this in mind - it seems that the more strident the voices on <ambit> become, the more the response from others is silence.
Chris
At 10:08 am +0100 23/10/02, simon fildes & katrina mcpherson wrote:
--Did Beverley actually say that these people left because of the current debate?If they just left without stating a reason then that should be made clear now. To imply otherwise is wrong and bad. If they said they left because of the current debate then they obviously have a head-in-the-sand approach to world politics. You can't have a list like this without engaging with the wider social political context. The CCA issue only serves to highlight this. Beverley?
--------------------------------------------------------
Chris Byrne [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------
New Media Scotland tel: +44 131 477 3774 P.O. Box 23434, Edinburgh EH7 5SZ fax: +44 131 477 3775
Scotland, UK http://www.mediascot.org
--------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
a m b i t : networking media arts in scotland
post: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
archive: http://www.mediascot.org/ambit
info: send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and write "info ambit" in the message body
-------------------------------------------------
