>Not directly but in any community/collective I know if someone 'stands up in a >meeting' and makes a suggestion involving work then such an intervention >carries with it the implication (and perhaps responsibility) that they are >also willing to share in that work. > >Otherwise the intervention could be mistaken for being somewhat aristocratic.
Weeelllll, c'mon, he's chiming in with what seems to be a good idea, but good to do some arm-twisting before he gets too deep into academia ;-)) I am of the same opinion, and probably cannot join in on the task as I have other facilitation tasks already. BUT, see below -- it's hard to say yes OR no without a clear description of the job! >The examples you gave of larger networks of moderation implies that having >been part of the early phase need not preclude being part of the new >rotation in fact a blend of experience and new blood might enrich any new >model under consideration. excellent suggestion David, and with steady rotation and an experience-base to further stabilize things maybe nettime continues, or maybe not. a decade is a long time in this biz. change can also mean death. In this Light, I would challenge Felix and Ted (and any others feeling qualified) to write a brief task description of the (different) roles/positions necessary to run nettime as it is today. Put it out here. I certainly have some interest, but would need to know the scalability and absolute size of what tasks are necessary, and how they are (technically and socially) accomplished... Cheers John # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected]
