Bruce, your point about civil discourse is interesting in view of the fact that until I joined, entry to the group was not moderated. (I don't know if the two were related!)
And yes, in today's "uncivil" world, where offence is taken so much more easily than the path to assuming goodwill...our silken courtesy to one another seems like a gem of purest ray serene... On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 10:28 PM, Bruce A. Metcalf <[email protected]> wrote: > Shrabonti Bagchi wrote: > >> >> http://factordaily.com/silk-indias-oldest-mailing-list-history-geek-culture/ > > > How very flattering to be mentioned favorably in such august company; > especially in a week where I find myself dangerously short on positive > energy. And to be called a philosopher to boot, well.... > > It seems that perhaps I have written with more elegance than information if > I am thought primarily a railroad engineer. True, I was a railroad conductor > part-time for six years, but mostly I've worked as a reference librarian and > technical writer -- backed up for economic reasons with being a college > instructor in electronics, tech writing, and subatomic physics -- and now in > retirement I manage a non-profit historical society where my specialty is > heraldry. > > If I do have wisdom to share from my years in the electronic trenches, it's > knowledge paid for in blood. Mostly my own, but also that drawn > (inadvertently or not) by my keyboard from others. I suspect that any > reasonably intelligent person who has been actively online for over thirty > years would have learned as much if they pay close attention -- and are able > to keep their ego at bay (something my countrymen are notoriously poor at, > vis the Cheezy Poof we have running for president). > > But the secondary point of the article (after Silk's historicity), is that > online groups can indeed conduct civil conversations over long periods with > minimal disruption. I think Silk's main advantage is not so much our 2.5 > rules than Udhay's careful allocation of invitations. That, and a certain > amount of self-selection when pot stirring generates no response, or worse, > gentle ridicule. > > The challenge is to find ways to translate this talent for civil discourse > into civil society. This is a non-trivial task in this uncivil age we live > in. I suppose my best hope is to practice here more, and hope it rubs off > onto the rest of my encounters with humanity. > > Can't hurt to try. > > Cheers, > / Bruce / >
