Re: Racial and sexual balance
Bruce Bostwick wrote: >> It is not offensive to me is because it would >> address the inequity in proportionate representation >> between white men and minority women in government... >> Jon > > If they're qualified for the job (which I fully believe many are, > possibly much more than they're commonly given credit for), then go by > the qualifications themselves. Same with anyone else who is qualified > for the job. The inequity does exist, for most minorities, > particularly for female applicants, and I don't intend to deny that. > But it's just as racist to hand-pick one applicant for their gender/ > religion/ethnicity and *then* evaluate them for qualifications as it > is to use any other gender/religion/ethnicity as a desired starting > point. The inequity exists because of exactly that sort of prejudiced > preselection in the process, to a large extent. > > (To a smaller extent, it's dependent on inequities in the higher > education system that make it somewhat more difficult to become > "qualified" for the job, in the sense of obtaining degrees, etc., but > that is a rapidly declining factor these days. To the extent that > access to education is a factor, *that* is probably the best place to > make adjustments as far as those inequities go, rather than adjusting > the requirements for the jobs themselves to meet quotas.) I think Affirmative action is racist and wrong. However I see nothing wrong in giving lower income people a leg up especially when it comes to education. This would benefit minorities disproportionally but it wouldn't be an attempt to correct racism with a racist solution. Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Future of the list / Questions?
Julia Thompson wrote:
> I'm getting new entries for one blog e-mailed to me. I usually click on
> the link to take me to the blog site because it's prettier than the
> e-mail, and if anyone's left a comment, that's how I'll see it, but if I
> didn't care about the aesthetics or comments, I could just read the
> e-mails and leave it at that.
>
> (The folks running that particular blog did *not* want an LJ syndication
> set up for it, and once I looked at the website and found out I could get
> new entries e-mailed to me, I signed up for that, so I'm still in my "only
> one site to check for everything not in e-mail" state.)
>
I've been through this a few times, and my experience is that moving to
a web-type forum generally means the end of the community. Sometimes I
think that is the intention ("I'm getting too much e-mail, how can we
cut it down?").
I have a quote in my sig file that goes "A university is what a college
becomes when it stops caring about its students." I think a corollary
should be that a web forum is what a discussion list becomes when people
stop caring about the conversation.
Regards,
--
Kevin B. O'Brien TANSTAAFL
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux User #333216
Paid for by the Tirebiter for Political Solutions Committee, Sector R.
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Future of the list / Questions?
On Oct 22, 2008, at 7:04 PM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote: >>> Also, as someone has mentioned, many people prefer having the >>> messages come to them (as on a list like this) rather than them >>> having to remember to look somewhere else for them . . . >> >> Now, this isn't necessarily a problem if you set the RSS feed up >> right. (I follow several online communities from my mail client, >> which can import RSS feeds along with mail accounts. > > > Which mail client would that be, if you don't mind saying? > > > . . . ronn! :) Apple Mail. (I'm very much a Mac person, currently considering expanding into Linux for home server and possibly CNC machine controller applications, but for my personal machine, OS X only.) :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Future of the list / Questions?
At 05:42 PM Wednesday 10/22/2008, Bruce Bostwick wrote: >On Oct 22, 2008, at 5:33 PM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote: > > > One problem is that compared to an e-mail list like this, most of the > > "web-based communities" have too rigid a structure, while this is > > much like an informal conversation where one person says something > > and then someone else responds, etc., and there may be different > > individual conversations going on between subsets of the group at the > > same time, etc. > >And too rigid a structure can be a community-killer, as I've seen >happen more than once over more than 25 years. Online communities >that rely on the technology to structure the communication too >tightly, as well as the ones that are very strict on enforcing >topicality, tend to have low populations, and going from less >structure to more structure or radically altering the technology base >of the community can trigger population crashes as people are driven >off by the hassle factor. The e-list format does very much resemble a >conversation, as well as some degree of cross-pollination between >conversation threads, and the blog format can sometimes isolate the >topical threads *too* much. That was the objection on the other list, including the fact that a small group would choose the topics of the various blog threads and approve all responses. (The e-mail list was and is moderated, but as it happens many of those who had been on the list for 10 years or better had also known each other in RL beginning as much as 25 or more years ago, while those who were going to be in charge of the blog system were by comparison relative newcomers. (Yeah, it's complicated, and I'm trying to avoid compromising some peoples' privacy by not going into all of the specifics . . . )) > > Also, as someone has mentioned, many people prefer having the > > messages come to them (as on a list like this) rather than them > > having to remember to look somewhere else for them . . . > >Now, this isn't necessarily a problem if you set the RSS feed up >right. (I follow several online communities from my mail client, >which can import RSS feeds along with mail accounts. Which mail client would that be, if you don't mind saying? . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Future of the list / Questions?
On Wed, 22 Oct 2008, Bruce Bostwick wrote: > On Oct 22, 2008, at 5:33 PM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote: > >> Also, as someone has mentioned, many people prefer having the >> messages come to them (as on a list like this) rather than them >> having to remember to look somewhere else for them . . . > > Now, this isn't necessarily a problem if you set the RSS feed up > right. (I follow several online communities from my mail client, > which can import RSS feeds along with mail accounts. Getting xkcd in > my morning email is a delightful thing to wake up to. :) I'm getting new entries for one blog e-mailed to me. I usually click on the link to take me to the blog site because it's prettier than the e-mail, and if anyone's left a comment, that's how I'll see it, but if I didn't care about the aesthetics or comments, I could just read the e-mails and leave it at that. (The folks running that particular blog did *not* want an LJ syndication set up for it, and once I looked at the website and found out I could get new entries e-mailed to me, I signed up for that, so I'm still in my "only one site to check for everything not in e-mail" state.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Future of the list / Questions?
On Oct 22, 2008, at 5:33 PM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote: > One problem is that compared to an e-mail list like this, most of the > "web-based communities" have too rigid a structure, while this is > much like an informal conversation where one person says something > and then someone else responds, etc., and there may be different > individual conversations going on between subsets of the group at the > same time, etc. And too rigid a structure can be a community-killer, as I've seen happen more than once over more than 25 years. Online communities that rely on the technology to structure the communication too tightly, as well as the ones that are very strict on enforcing topicality, tend to have low populations, and going from less structure to more structure or radically altering the technology base of the community can trigger population crashes as people are driven off by the hassle factor. The e-list format does very much resemble a conversation, as well as some degree of cross-pollination between conversation threads, and the blog format can sometimes isolate the topical threads *too* much. > Also, as someone has mentioned, many people prefer having the > messages come to them (as on a list like this) rather than them > having to remember to look somewhere else for them . . . Now, this isn't necessarily a problem if you set the RSS feed up right. (I follow several online communities from my mail client, which can import RSS feeds along with mail accounts. Getting xkcd in my morning email is a delightful thing to wake up to. :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Future of the list / Questions?
At 01:01 AM Wednesday 10/22/2008, Dave Land wrote: >On Oct 21, 2008, at 1:46 PM, Nick Arnett wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Wayne Eddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > >> Should it move to a newer type of platform? Facebook or a wiki > >> maybe? Does the list have a life of its own? Does it somehow > >> attract the type of member that will enable it live forever? Are > >> monotonous posts and trolls and heated discussions the way it has > >> found to survive? > > > > I hate to pre-announce... but I'm working on installing a blog > > interface. I also hope to mirror that blog to another server, as > > backup. > >As long as the email interface persists, please. > >I like the fact that it comes to me, rather than my having one more >place to go to check out the goings-on. Several communities of which >I've been a part have "threatened" to go all-web (for various reasons) >and the practically universal response has been "but keep the emails >coming." This happened a few months ago on another list I am on. The list owners presented it as a done deal that the e-mail list would be terminated and replaced by a blog-type forum run by the officers of the organization on such-and-such a date. (IIRC less than two weeks after the first mention of it to list members.) After many people stated that they preferred the e-mail list, and were told "No," and long time members of the list made their good-byes, those in charge changed their minds and re-started the e-mail list. >Which puts me a bit at odds with my employer, probably, since we make >our living by running web-based communities. One problem is that compared to an e-mail list like this, most of the "web-based communities" have too rigid a structure, while this is much like an informal conversation where one person says something and then someone else responds, etc., and there may be different individual conversations going on between subsets of the group at the same time, etc. Also, as someone has mentioned, many people prefer having the messages come to them (as on a list like this) rather than them having to remember to look somewhere else for them . . . . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Racial and sexual balance
On Oct 22, 2008, at 2:49 PM, Jon Louis Mann wrote: >> Choosing someone for a public office >> based on their gender/religion/ethnicity >> first and their qualifications second >> is as offensive to me in the case of >> choosing "a qualified Hispanic >> woman" as it is "a qualified white man". >> (I'm willing to make an exception in the >> case of challenging a previously >> unchallenged stereotype and not enabling >> a historical hysteria about it, but this >> in particular doesn't seem to qualify.) > > It is not offensive to me is because it would > address the inequity in proportionate representation > between white men and minority women in government... > Jon If they're qualified for the job (which I fully believe many are, possibly much more than they're commonly given credit for), then go by the qualifications themselves. Same with anyone else who is qualified for the job. The inequity does exist, for most minorities, particularly for female applicants, and I don't intend to deny that. But it's just as racist to hand-pick one applicant for their gender/ religion/ethnicity and *then* evaluate them for qualifications as it is to use any other gender/religion/ethnicity as a desired starting point. The inequity exists because of exactly that sort of prejudiced preselection in the process, to a large extent. (To a smaller extent, it's dependent on inequities in the higher education system that make it somewhat more difficult to become "qualified" for the job, in the sense of obtaining degrees, etc., but that is a rapidly declining factor these days. To the extent that access to education is a factor, *that* is probably the best place to make adjustments as far as those inequities go, rather than adjusting the requirements for the jobs themselves to meet quotas.) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Racial and Gender imbalance
> > > > I still would have preferred that Obama > > > > picked a qualified Hispanic woman for his > VP. > > Jon > > She would certainly be preferable to Palin!~) > > Seriously, there are many eligible Hispanic women who > are qualified to > > break the glass ceiling of vice presidential politics > for gender balance, as > > well as minority inclusion. > > Hispanics are fast becoming a majority in many parts > of America, so it is > > only right that they receive proportionate > representation in government at > > the highest levels. > > In my lifetime alone, enormous progress has been made, > partly because of > > affirmative action. > > Jon > I'll bite... > Would you care to name a few Latinas > that you feel would be qualified? > john I'll bite back, and take your bait, John. Surely you are you not suggesting that Hispanic women are not qualified to lead? I doubt that you would reach such a racist and sexist conclusion. Back in 1968 Hispanic women started to address the imbalance: http://www.hwil.org/1.html Heer is a link to prominent Hispanic women in business: http://www.hbwa.net/ Hispanic women in leadership: http://www.hwil.org/1.html Female Governors http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_female_state_governors_in_the_United_States#List_of_female_state_governors It is true that Hispanic women have rarely achieved the sort of prominence of Sarah Palin, but that has largely been because they are brown skinned and female. I believe there has been one acting Hispanic female governor, however. The first female governor elected without being the wife or widow of a past state governor was Ella T. Grasso of Connecticut in 1975. I was only able to find a couple Hispanic women in Congress: http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/popup/80elitewomen.asp?year=2003&id=115 http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/popup/80elitewomen.asp?year=2003&id=114 but no Senators, yet... That is slowly beginning to change with the emerging political power of Hispanics in certain sections of America. It is also being expressed in the growth of Hispanic cultural worldwide. Finally, here is a link to delays in Senate Action on Judicial Nominations: http://leahy.senate.gov/press/199806/980618b.html Hope this answers your question? Jon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Racial and Gender imbalance
> > > > I still would have preferred that Obama > > > > picked a qualified Hispanic woman for his > VP. > > Jon > > She would certainly be preferable to Palin!~) > > Seriously, there are many eligible Hispanic women who > are qualified to > > break the glass ceiling of vice presidential politics > for gender balance, as > > well as minority inclusion. > > Hispanics are fast becoming a majority in many parts > of America, so it is > > only right that they receive proportionate > representation in government at > > the highest levels. > > In my lifetime alone, enormous progress has been made, > partly because of > > affirmative action. > > Jon > I'll bite... > Would you care to name a few Latinas > that you feel would be qualified? > john I'll bite back, and take your bait, John. Surely you are you not suggesting that Hispanic women are not qualified to lead? I doubt that you would reach such a racist and sexist conclusion. Back in 1968 Hispanic women started to address the imbalance: http://www.hwil.org/1.html Heer is a link to prominent Hispanic women in business: http://www.hbwa.net/ Hispanic women in leadership: http://www.hwil.org/1.html Female Governors http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_female_state_governors_in_the_United_States#List_of_female_state_governors It is true that Hispanic women have rarely achieved the sort of prominence of Sarah Palin, but that has largely been because they are brown skinned and female. I believe there has been one acting Hispanic female governor, however. The first female governor elected without being the wife or widow of a past state governor was Ella T. Grasso of Connecticut in 1975. I was only able to find a couple Hispanic women in Congress: http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/popup/80elitewomen.asp?year=2003&id=115 http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/popup/80elitewomen.asp?year=2003&id=114 but no Senators, yet... That is slowly beginning to change with the emerging political power of Hispanics in certain sections of America. It is also being expressed in the growth of Hispanic cultural worldwide. Finally, here is a link to delays in Senate Action on Judicial Nominations: http://leahy.senate.gov/press/199806/980618b.html Hope this answers your question? Jon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Racial, sexual and religious bigotry
, Oct 22, 2008 at 3:42 PM, Jon Louis Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I still would have preferred that Obama > > > picked a qualified Hispanic woman for his VP. > Jon > > > Like, say, J-Lo? > > Alberto Monteiro > > She would certainly be preferable to Palin!~) > Seriously, there are many eligible Hispanic women who are qualified to > break the glass ceiling of vice presidential politics for gender balance, as > well as minority inclusion. > Hispanics are fast becoming a majority in many parts of America, so it is > only right that they receive proportionate representation in government at > the highest levels. > In my lifetime alone, enormous progress has been made, partly because of > affirmative action. > Jon > > > > ___ > http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l > I'll bite... Would you care to name a few Latinas that you feel would be qualified? john ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Racial and sexual balance
> Choosing someone for a public office > based on their gender/religion/ethnicity > first and their qualifications second > is as offensive to me in the case of > choosing "a qualified Hispanic > woman" as it is "a qualified white man". > (I'm willing to make an exception in the > case of challenging a previously > unchallenged stereotype and not enabling > a historical hysteria about it, but this > in particular doesn't seem to qualify.) It is not offensive to me is because it would address the inequity in proportionate representation between white men and minority women in government... Jon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Racial, sexual and religious bigotry
> > I still would have preferred that Obama > > picked a qualified Hispanic woman for his VP. Jon > Like, say, J-Lo? > Alberto Monteiro She would certainly be preferable to Palin!~) Seriously, there are many eligible Hispanic women who are qualified to break the glass ceiling of vice presidential politics for gender balance, as well as minority inclusion. Hispanics are fast becoming a majority in many parts of America, so it is only right that they receive proportionate representation in government at the highest levels. In my lifetime alone, enormous progress has been made, partly because of affirmative action. Jon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Weekly Chat Reminder
The Brin-L weekly chat has been a list tradition for over ten years. Way back on 27 May, 1998, Marco Maisenhelder first set up a chatroom for the list, and on the next day, he established a weekly chat time. We've been through several servers, chat technologies, and even casts of regulars over the years, but the chat goes on... and we want more recruits! Whether you're an active poster or a lurker, whether you've been a member of the list from the beginning or just joined today, we would really like for you to join us. We have less politics, more Uplift talk, and more light-hearted discussion. We're non-fattening and 100% environmentally friendly... -(_() Though sometimes marshmallows do get thrown. The Weekly Brin-L chat is scheduled for Wednesday 3 PM Eastern/2 PM Central time in the US, or 7 PM Greenwich time. There's usually somebody there to talk to for at least eight hours after the start time. If no-one is there when you arrive just wait around a while for the next person to show up! If you want to attend, it's really easy now. All you have to do is send your web browser to: http://wtgab.demon.co.uk/~brinl/mud/ ..And you can connect directly from the NEW new web interface! -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ "This message was sent automatically using launchd. But even if WTG is away on holiday, at least it shows the server is still up." ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Future of the list / Questions?
On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, Dave Land wrote: > On Oct 21, 2008, at 1:46 PM, Nick Arnett wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 1:36 PM, Wayne Eddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >>> Should it move to a newer type of platform? Facebook or a wiki >>> maybe? Does the list have a life of its own? Does it somehow >>> attract the type of member that will enable it live forever? Are >>> monotonous posts and trolls and heated discussions the way it has >>> found to survive? >> >> I hate to pre-announce... but I'm working on installing a blog >> interface. I also hope to mirror that blog to another server, as >> backup. > > As long as the email interface persists, please. > > I like the fact that it comes to me, rather than my having one more > place to go to check out the goings-on. Several communities of which > I've been a part have "threatened" to go all-web (for various reasons) > and the practically universal response has been "but keep the emails > coming." I suspect that's why there's been such little move to go set up web forums in one of my RL communities. I mean, who wants to deal with that when you can just sit there and hope that Julia sets up a Yahoo group for it? :) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
