Hello: First I want to endorse the congratulations to Sally and Arthur for the anniversary of FW. I can't remember the date I became a memeber of the list, but I've been here for no less than four years, I guess. In this period of time, I think that I've read about 50% of all the messages posted. As Keith Hudson said, it -certainly- is an education for me. As a mexican reader who is almost ignorant about economy, not all the issues are of the same interest, but I have learned a lot from Keith, Ed Weick, Ray Evans Harrel and some others whose writings do not vanishes into the ether. I am a lurker because I have much to learn but not much to say, and sometimes when I think I can give my "two cents" to the debate language becomes a problem. Now I'm going to drink my first cup of cofee of the morning. �Salud, Keith! Regards from Mexico City Salvador
> Yes, congratulations on keeping the FW ship afloat during the last six > years since the launch. > > Futureworker subscribers are a varied and intelligent group and we've had a > variety of views -- expressed with varying degrees of courtesy. Some > express themselves carefully to try and work through to solutions; some, > who already know the answers, confine themselves to the easy path of always > criticising others and never putting up a case of their own because it > might be criticised in turn; some have agendas that are quite different > from the aims of this list; and some fall into the trap of labelling others > with this emotive name or that to save themselves the bother of having to > think. > > There's also another category of subscriber -- the lurkers. There's nothing > wrong with lurking, of course. Maybe -- who knows? -- it's an education for > some. Nevertheless, for those of us who write fairly regularly on FW, it's > hard to know sometimes whether what one is writing is actually being read > by lurkers, or whether it's vanishing into the ether. I know that at least > one or two FWers simply delete a message whenever they see my name. But, to > be honest, I do the same. Or, rather, I used to. We don't seem to have some > of the single-issue subscribers, not really interested in employment, whom > we had in the early days. > > I deeply value the views of several FW writers and, overall, this list has > been quite an important part of my daily life for most of the last six > years since you invited me. It gives me reason to think most days of the > week. > > At the time I joined, I'd recently started "The Job Society" in England in > order to create a pressure group for jobs. But that didn't work out. I had > little support from the various politicians I'd got to know during previous > years. > > Then, some years ago, I unsubscribed from FW list for about 18 months when > I told myself to shut up talking about jobs and get on with creating a few > for others in real life instead. Also, I wanted to try out the Internet as > a medium for a business. Which is what I did. The business hasn't been a > spectacular success in the sense that I'm now a millionnaire (which I'm > not!) but, unlike 95% of dot-com businesses in the last couple of years, my > firm has at least survived. I'm proud that five young people out of my > team of eight colleagues are now earning a reasonable income in a central > European ex-communist country (prosperous prior to WWII) which continues to > spiral downwards in misery, corruption, drug-taking and AIDS among > something like 25% of their young people in the cities. > > But I am increasingly delegating my work in that business and am retiring > for the third time in my life. So, unless Sally and Arthur decide to stop > FW list, or unless I'm told to go for making a nuisance of myself, I'll > remain now and will hopefully continue to write most days of the week while > I am drinking my first morning pot of tea. To those of you who think I'm an > old reactionary -- hard cheese! You'll be one yourself when you're my age. > > Keith
