On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Charles Matthews <
charles.r.matthews(a)ntlworld.com> wrote:
Here's a literary answer I bring out every few
years: Solzhenitsyn in
"First Circle" described the use of chalk and blackboards to resolve
disputes (in the context of scientists in a "camp" supposed to design a
scrambler phone for Stalin). That apparently worked; while mailing list
threads seem designed to prove that electrons are worse than chalk. But
of course that is largely a function of the rules and moderation: in the
"First Circle" context the audience would quickly decide who was in the
right, and bring the business to a halt.
I do not have the faith you expressed in the efficacy of "mailing list
technology", an opinion perhaps not unconnected with reading three years
of ArbCom mail. It is entirely appropriate to ask whether a list will
give good results, given the nature of lists.
Technically speaking, I was being a bit ironic in referring to mailing lists
as "technology [that works]." Maybe my irony was too subtle.
Solzhenitsyn. Consider that with each new context, the same ideas will be
reanimated to see if they actually work in the new context, even while they
failed in the old.
I like your point about electrons (now) being less useful than chalk (then),
as it goes to the real issue of interaction in being: Interaction in the
context of human being requires human expressiveness through gesture and..
well.. being. Electron interaction concepts can be quite different and less
conducive to the things which make beings happy.
-Stevertigo