[Winona Online Democracy]
Tania:
I would be very interested to hear your suggestions for improving the
"technical friendliness" of WOD. We are currently looking at an alternative
format and I'd be very interested to see how your suggestions might be
incorporated into or compare with the proposed system changes.
I suspect we might disagree on many aspects of what WOD is or isn't, but I
respect your perceptions as valid for you. What I'm interested in is how to
bridge the gap between conflicting opinions or conclusions.
I agree (as do most on the steering committee) that WOD's membership is not
a representative sample of the community at large. But is it any less so
than other community groups discussing issues of import to the members? Is
it less diverse than say the Lions or Rotary clubs with whom elected
officials frequently choose to visit? I suppose WOD invites criticism of
this nature as it seeks to reach "community-wide" and has not to met that
lofty aspiration. It is a work in progress, though.
You state that "uncommon opinions" may move participants out of their
comfort zone. Interestingly enough, I reviewed some of Dr.Schild's data
again today and he reported in 2004 that:
"A large majority-29 (71%)-reported messages written by people they disagree
with. Adding in the ll respondents who reported reading all the messages
means that 40 of 41 (98%) availed themselves of messages they disagree
with."
That hardly supports the idea that members only read their own opinions.
True, the sample was of infrequent posters, but I would dare say that there
are many opinions voiced on WOD with which I disagree, too. I suspect that
other frequent posters might indicate this as well. This hardly supports the
idea that WOD members are an elite, homogeneous group of folks. Dr. Schild's
data also show a perception that our frequent posters tend toward the
"liberal" in their politics. I think that is probably accurate. I am
grateful to those conservative members who share their perspectives and I am
open to hearing more from them and others. How do you suggest that WOD reach
out to a greater variety of readers/participants?
You state that the "WOD elite" defend "rather than seriously looking at how
it is lacking in participation and impact." On what do you base this
position? I just sent a link to the report for the survey done to assess the
members' opinions for increasing participation. Does that not meet your
definition of a serious look at the issue?
Finally, my message to John had nothing to do with the content of his
message, but was regarding the frequency of his posting yesterday. My
intent was to question the rationale that leads to a conclusion that
individuals are banned for the content of opinions. Rather the decision to
remove a member is based on objective criteria to which all members have
agreed to abide at the time of subscription. One of which is a limit of two
posts per day.
Kathy Seifert
_______________________________________________
This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
Any problems or suggestions can be directed to
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at
http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
