Diana:
Considering all these problems with online discussion really gives you a
hankering for the structured world of academia, doesn't it? <g>
Since I don't participate regularly, and in fact do not subscribe to the
moderated echo, my opinions likely have little measure, and that's as it
should be. On the other hand, you don't think I'm going to set myself up to
give an opinion and miss the opportunity, do you? (That would be SO out of
character for a member of this discussion!)
1. Quality discussion requires respect and decorum, and moderation is firstly
an attempt to guarantee those. (Do people really want to wade through
flames?)
2. There is an expectation of progress in building on the MOQ; thus
prescribed subjects (whether popularly-chosen or assigned) seem de rigeur to
me. I cannot think of anything more to say about that.
3. Lastly, if a term of discussion for a particular subject is decided, it is
necessary for participants to post in a *timely* fashion. Obviously a term
could be stretched if necessary (should a majority determine this course, or
should it be unanimous? I do not know), but if a term of discussion has
ended, would-be late posters should accept the fact of their tardiness with
grace, and move on to the next subject. Perhaps summarizations of particular
points of view could be accepted and posted to the web site after discussion
is ended.
As far as FAQs are concerned, I think they're great, as long as they're
updated. Does that mean secretaries will have to be chosen? <shudder>
Honestly I doubt my thoughts on this are anything new, but I hope I have
succeeded in outlining the kind of discussion (or bag-unpacking) I should
prefer.
-Scott "one of Pirsig's many sub-porters"
:P
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
