Dear All,
I agree with Krassimir's suggestions. Implementing them would relieve a
certain frustration one experiences. On the other hand, the discipline of
not posting more than two substantive messages a week, which should contain
something really new, is essential.
Joseph
----- Original Message -----
From: "Krassimir Markov" <mar...@foibg.com>
To: <fis@listas.unizar.es>
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 9:16 PM
Subject: [Fis] About weekly posting frequency.
Dear Pedro, Jerry, and FIS Colleagues,
Several times I have not finished my discussions because of very long time I
needed to wait for next (third or fourth) letter.
Practically no serious discussion could be provided - only messages on the
moment and, of course - invited starting and finishing explanations.
In the same time, I see that the active part of FIS colleagues who really
write letters is not so great.
And this part is separated in other two parts - colleagues who are
permanently "on line" and those who respond only if it is in their short
interest area.
Because of this I propose to add two new rules:
- to permit posting more than two or three letters if and only if they
contain questions for clarifying the already presented ideas from other
colleagues. It is possible to send such letters "of line" but practically
one and the same questions rise from different colleagues and it is more
good to see that such questions are already sent. For me, the questions are
important part of the discussions. To make clear that the letter contains
questions, in subject of the letter may be written "Question ...".
- to answer the questions in cumulative manner, i.e. the answering person
has to collect questions and to answer to all of them in one or two letters.
In this case we may permit two additional letters for answering the
questions with corresponded subject: "Answers ...".
For explanations, comments and other messages I think two letters per week
are enough
Friendly regards
Krassimir
-----Original Message-----
From: pedro marijuan
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 9:00 PM
To: fis@listas.unizar.es
Subject: [Fis] RV: FIS, Weekly posting frequency.
BlackBerry de movistar, allí donde estés está tu oficin@
-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry LR Chandler <jerry_lr_chand...@me.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 10:37:32
To: Pedro C. Marijuan<pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>
Subject: FIS, Weekly posting frequency.
Pedro:
Just a small suggestion about the rules for posting to the FIS list serve.
Personally, I find the current constraint of two posts per week is so
restrictive that it makes a conversation very difficult. It necessitates
long delays, during which time, one looses interest in the topic. (We are
flooded by a plethora of new ideas!)
I feel that the value of the list would be enhanced by permitting three or
even four posts per week.
I would suggest that you consult with other members about this issue.
You may post this message to the list serve if you wish.
Cheers
Jerry
On Nov 3, 2014, at 5:09 AM, Pedro C. Marijuan wrote:
Dear Marcin and colleagues,
Many thanks for the sympathy and for the suggestion. I think your proposal
is quite in the spirit of the fis initiative. Maintaining the academic
code of conduct should be the First Rule of the list. The Second Rule, as
is well known, says that only two messages per week are allowed. And the
Third Rule, should be about clean posting. I mean, in order to placate the
susceptibility of the server filters the messages should be addressed only
to fis, exclusively, (a few other addresses might appear in the "cc", but
the lesser the better), and not dragging old messages at the bottom is
strongly recommended... Additionally, we have a fis steering committee
(integrated by Yixin, Krassimir, Shu-Kun, and myself) that can arbitrate
in contentious cases where the First Rule should apply.
Let us forget the present incident; always clarifying that FIS list is
completely open to criticisms, first on fis itself, and also addressed to
any other school or doctrine, either contemporary or from the past...
knowing the opinion of "contrarians" is as much important as knowing the
opinions of the followers. INFORMATION HAS ENORMOUSLY CHANGED OUR
SCIENTIFIC-ECONOMIC-CULTURAL-SOCIAL WORLD AND WE NEED RADICALLY DIFFERENT
IDEAS. By the way, there is an important work on "social physics" (but
arguing from the information flow point of view) by Alex Pentland that in
my opinion establishes the very foundations of "SOCIAL INFORMATION
SCIENCE"--it is a pity, and possibly an error (?), that this author has
placed his exciting research under the banner of physics.
best wishes ---Pedro
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
