Givens re egroups

Murli Nagasundaram rismurli at cobfac.boisestate.edu
Wed Jun 28 14:12:34 PDT 2000


Another clarification:

Listserv is no more and no less secure than Egroups.   Anyone -- just
anyone -- with the necessary subscription instructions  can subscribe to
either.  The subscription instructions are publicly available.  Anyone --
just anyone -- who has subscribed, can access the archives which are
available on the web in both forums.  Both sets of archives are accessible
via the web. There is no difference except for the additional features
available on Egroups.

At this point, 24 (out of 162 on Egroups) have chosen to vote:  16 have
been for the switch, and 8 against the switch.  As someone remarked, the
sample size is too small.  And there is the issue of self-selection.

34 messages have been posted there at this point.

OSLIST will be available at both places.  Consider continuing to use
LISTSERV for general discussions, and use the Chat, polling, links,
database and calendaring features of Egroups as a supplement.  Why not use
both?  Why not use all (including Harrison's and other
suggestions)?  Pretty soon, we will need to learn to use all these
technologies -- otherwise we might be missing some powerful opportunities.

Yes, OS does not require, and should not require technology.  But heck,
OSLIST would not exist if were not for technology and technology
users.  Aren't we already excluding all those OS practitioners who do not
have access to technology, or are not aware of OSLIST yet?  Don't you
suppose there are more than 292 persons in the world interested in OS?

OSLIST users, by defintion, are not technophobes, but actually find it
useful.  Perhaps it might be nice for us to be the torch-bearers, scouts,
explorers, who bring back good tidings about the new lands of technology in OS.

My 2 (plus 1) cents.

Murli

At 01:58 PM 6/28/00 -0700, you wrote:
>I have been silent on this issue, since I am just catching up in reading
>past messages. I have no  technological wisedom to contribute but
>Michelle's question (below) touched upon a cord.
>
>I feel the OSChatlist is a coummunity. There was something safe about
>exploring ideas and questions within a community of people that we know
>have some understanding of what we may be talking about...may sound
>pretty weird to many web browsers who have not a clue or little basic
>information. There is a vulnerability in thingking out loud, attaching
>your name to it and sending to an address that could be: "The world".
>In OS, participants usually have a general idea of who's there, and if
>they feel safe, that it's the right people, they open up their passion
>to the group, knowing that there might be "a few strangers" - but
>strangers will not form the majority of the group.
>
>Who's there on the egroup (web accessed) will no longer be answerable it
>seems. Like Michelle, I acknowledge that once something is on email,
>there is no garantee. That is already taken into consideration. But
>talking to a group you know has been following the conversation an
>talking to "G " knows who? makes for a different dialogue.
>
>I don't know how far we are down the path to a no return but I thought I
>would no longer be a silent whose consent is concluded to be implicit.
>
>
>Diane Gibeault
>
>Michelle Cooper wrote:
>
>Since this seems to be proceeding anyway, is it time to relook at the
>givens
>of this list, e-group, whatever?  How are we opening and creating safe
>space
>in the new format? I realize that anything we put out here in writing is
>a
>risk and might be used by anyone in any way. There have been some deeply
>
>personal conversations and sharing on the list, which is part of the
>richness. Did we say up front conversations would be archived and posted
>to
>a web site? Would this have made a difference to people?
>Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
>  name="dgp.vcf"
>Content-Description: Card for Diane Gibeault
>Content-Disposition: attachment;
>  filename="dgp.vcf"
>X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by
>listserv.boisestate.edu id KAA11923



More information about the OSList mailing list