Greetings Economists,
On Jan 11, 2008, at 8:53 AM, Leigh Meyers wrote:

It's EXACTLY what listservs are for...

Doyle,
I'm not sure what you mean by exactly here, but what a listserv
doesn't do is provide an environment for working on a topic in the
sense that wikis offer organized means of collaborating.  One can't do
much with a listserv except encourage people to write in.  They do if
they feel like it.  It's a loose and disjointed process of production
with no particular defining method other than topic as you indicate by
your comment about bad form, and moderator keeping order and making
the list interesting to read.

Text to me is very difficult to work equally on.  People can co-write
things on a list but how to organize that in a meaningful way eludes
me, other than searching an archive for what?  If I were to look at
blogs in relation to lists, they represent more extensive investment
in personal care about what is offered up to be viewed, but carries on
the same sort of chaos that listservs create by lack of focus in the
brain work process.  Michael's list works well enough in the
limitations of the medium.

I like Wikipedia for it's immense reach of topics.  That to me is an
indication that including various forms in a listserv is not an
issue.  In other words movie reviews are not 'bad form' in my view.
What usually is 'bad form' is escalating to intense feelings and
picking unnecessary fights.  This is because the medium does not have
some way to regulated or observe modulating feelings in a sense that
say face to face does.  These are all issues of bandwidth and limited
means of producing information.

And son on.  I mean I could go on quite a bit, but a listerv cannot
really aspire much above my previous three paragraphs, much as I would
like to see a more ambitious left project get off the ground.
thanks,
hugs to Leigh,
Doyle

Reply via email to