I have been silent on this issue, since I am just catching up in reading past messages. I have no technological wisedom to contribute but Michelle's question (below) touched upon a cord.
I feel the OSChatlist is a coummunity. There was something safe about exploring ideas and questions within a community of people that we know have some understanding of what we may be talking about...may sound pretty weird to many web browsers who have not a clue or little basic information. There is a vulnerability in thingking out loud, attaching your name to it and sending to an address that could be: "The world". In OS, participants usually have a general idea of who's there, and if they feel safe, that it's the right people, they open up their passion to the group, knowing that there might be "a few strangers" - but strangers will not form the majority of the group. Who's there on the egroup (web accessed) will no longer be answerable it seems. Like Michelle, I acknowledge that once something is on email, there is no garantee. That is already taken into consideration. But talking to a group you know has been following the conversation an talking to "G " knows who? makes for a different dialogue. I don't know how far we are down the path to a no return but I thought I would no longer be a silent whose consent is concluded to be implicit. Diane Gibeault Michelle Cooper wrote: Since this seems to be proceeding anyway, is it time to relook at the givens of this list, e-group, whatever? How are we opening and creating safe space in the new format? I realize that anything we put out here in writing is a risk and might be used by anyone in any way. There have been some deeply personal conversations and sharing on the list, which is part of the richness. Did we say up front conversations would be archived and posted to a web site? Would this have made a difference to people?
<<attachment: dgp.vcf>>
