Karsten M. Self scripsit: > This problem is inherently a filtering issue, not a transport and > presentation issue.
This is somewhat OT, but I can't entirely agree; I believe it is also a structuring issue. The trouble with email (or web-forum) debate is that the total lack of structure makes it just a running, and generally repetitive, conversation. The IBIS methodology developed by Kunz and Rittel 30 years ago structures debate using an Issue-Position-Argument division. This is analogous to, but freer than, formal Roberts Rules viva voce debate. The normal practice on mailing lists is to raise an issue, take a position on the issue, and argue for the position all in one message. Replies are mixtures of trying to deprecate the issuel, raise alternate positions and argue for them, and oppose the existing arguments. IBIS gives people the tools to separate these. I am currently working on a set of tools called Elephant that implement IBIS. Elephant will be an open-source, Web plus email based implementation. For details on Elephant, see the following wiki entries: http://nuzban.wiw.org/wiki/?Elephant http://nuzban.wiw.org/wiki/?ElephantRefinements I urge anyone who wishes to collaborate with me on getting Elephant ready to roll, and who is a Perl programmer with some time to spare, to contact me. I could use some help. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please leave your values | Check your assumptions. In fact, at the front desk. | check your assumptions at the door. --sign in Paris hotel | --Miles Vorkosigan -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
