Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2000 15:44:09 -0500 Subject: Long, Long, Long, Post From: "Nathaniel I. Cordova" <cordova-AT-wam.umd.edu> Dear Folks: Malgosia, thanks for your post. Mr. Beasley-Murray thanks also for your contribution. This is a long, long, post about some of the issues your thoughts sparked in my mind. Ok, to tackle this definitional issue let me clarify what I envision. Substantive/Content My interest is in a forum where scholars (broadly defined) can contribute and carry on conversations about issues of subjectivity, and the subject from a variety of vantage points, disciplinary commitments, and/or political standpoints. My desire is that the conversations contribute to the understanding of what collective subjectivity is, can be, how various fields, disciplines tackle those issues, how various scholars have described it, connections and linkages between approaches, etc. I don't mind if people want to theorize a divide between theory and practice and find the "application" in that middle space, or if people want to talk about the WTO and the protests in Seattle from the vantage point of collectivities, their power, how they are constructed, induced and mobilized to act. Or perhaps talk about identities and group membership and the emancipatory potential or not of the same. I recognize that the "subject" is a theoretical construct, a conceptual scheme, and a large "structure" in social theory and as such very much an academic topic. In my years working with various communities, we never talked about "a subject" nor about "subjectivities" nor did we ever need to understand any such theories in order to do what we needed to do. Thus, I expect that membership for the forum would be mostly academics, although I can envision friends who worship Saul Alinsky and whom are not academics who would probably be interested. In terms of the knowledge generated I expect that it will serve much more the ends of academic scholars. However, there is no need to limit scholars to what is commonly understood as "scholarly" activities. Scholarship is not all we do in our lives, and everything we do can inform our various other practices. The right people are essential, but I do not want to set the success or usefulness of the list or discussions to having some key players on board. I admit that part of the reason for coming to the Spoon Collective is that I think the Spoon lists have captured the attention and participation of folks who are substantive scholars and who can drive and extend discussion, and thus the list would benefit from those who might be interested. But I will be very happy with a list who caters to those who while not luminaries, still go through the everyday hashing out of the issues under discussion. I am a member of a variety of lists, one of which has lots of key players in my field, yet the discussions nor the topics are very compelling or illuminating, perhaps as a result of much posturing, sniping, and intimidation of others in the list who remain the silent majority. This is a problem of lists in general. On inducement to Action/Significance I mean inducement to action, and mobilization in a broad way. Inducement to buy a chevy versus a Toyota is an interesting issue when looking at culture and the various ways of building identification, constituting subjects who fit a particular mold and so forth. I am not too interested in how Cinnabon's advertising provides identificatory hooks for folks to be recruited into a cinnabon consuming discourse, but rather I can see discussion on larger cultural signifying practices. To a certain extent these are issues that get hashed out with boundaries being delineated in situ. The section on the technology below might also have an influence on this matter. The Technology I crafted my proposal in terms of a new list in the traditional format because I was looking for a forum in which folks could participate in a fashion similar to listservs. That is, that they could post messages in response to others, or to initiate conversation. I still would like subscribers to have an searchable archive, and, if possible, to be able to receive their messages via email, although I am not against other methods. I would like the members to have the ability to get the info in digest format, and to postpone subscription over extended period of time. Since all of those considerations are benefits that traditional lists provide, I naturally went with a traditional list idea. However, I am familiar with web based bulletin board systems, in particular the Ultimate.cgi system and those provide a good alternative to lists. They provide multiple forums for better threaded conversations/discussions, it is web based so can center around a nice web site with other information or resources, can be accessed or not depending on participant's desires, members can avoid conversations they do not want to pursue, it still provides email capability or announcements, and can be much more interactive than a traditional listserv. I have set up one of these with 12 different forums. Each forum can have its own moderator, and forums can be reserved for special discussions, intensives, or other special events. Another benefit is that users don't have to fret too much about subscribing or unsubscribing as they would now with a listserv. A combination of listserv and this type of bulletin board would be a nice combination. This is the option that I am hoping to implement for the National Communication Association's Latino/a Communication Studies Division list, where the list is used for general chat and the bulletin board is used for substantive and/or specific topics in which maybe not all members want to participate. Other benefits of the Ultimate bulletin board system include: Integrated Search Engine Lost password auto-email Email notification of replies to topics Option to email passwords to newly registered users (this ensures users will have valid email addresses) Private Forums Email Ban Lists IP Logging/Display Anonymous Posting Options Email a Topic to Someone Ability to close threads Forum on/off switches Support for HTML within messages and/or UBB Code User profiles (can be updated by users) Extensive administrative features (make changes through browser) Ability to edit/delete/prune messages Online FAQ Graphical alert for posts that are new since the person last logged on Clickable "Hop Down" arrow that takes person to point in thread that is new since last log on Now, I don't provide all of the above information to convince you that this is the best option. There are negatives in terms of participation, it is not as immediate, and it costs some money ($150 or so) to purchase the software. But, if we are looking for alternatives to traditional list approaches then this is one, and we might as well know what it does. It might very well be the format I go with if I go solo. Does the technology make a difference? Like my friend from Minnesotta says, "You Betcha." But we can discuss that later. Ok, long enough. Thanks again, Best Regards, N. Cordova cordova-AT-wam.umd.edu
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005