On Mon, 09 May 2005 00:22:34 +0100, Alex Tweedly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

graham samuel wrote:

What happened to the protocol? for someone that wasn't there, I found
the transcript almost unreadable, with people interrupting each other,
and I couldn't work out if Kevin had in fact answered (or rejected)
all the questions he was asked. The first chat transcript was really
well-ordered. I suspect it was Jacque's influence; but whatever it
was, I hope for more discipline next time.

Different contexts. The first one was the Scripting Conference - first
in a series of well-organized and well-run on-line conferences -
featuring stacks of info prepared ahead of time, with follow-up
questions. And a protocol, and a Protocol Enforcer.

This was a fairly informal chat session where Kevin answered questions,
with much more open discussion. No protocol.

Yes, my bad, I hadn't realised that. I was too preoccupied with other things to note the context. Still, all multi-person conversations need some kind of protocol, even in a face-to-face situation, although as adults we have internalised the rules, in general. I remember one of my grandchildren being told to 'wait for a gap in the conversation' - this was in fact protocol training!

[snip]

Maybe if he repeats this chat session, we can nominate a moderator to funnel questions through, so that she selects a topic/question, and everyone sticks more or less to it for a little while, then select the next one, etc.

Yes - I hope someone can suggest such a protocol so that it's available as a model for future chats. I just want to emphasise this because I do think that the chat session is a very valuable tool, given Kevin's willingness to cooperate.


Graham

----------------------------------------
Graham Samuel / The Living Fossil Co. / UK and France


_______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Reply via email to