JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for PHD-DESIGN Archives


PHD-DESIGN Archives

PHD-DESIGN Archives


PHD-DESIGN@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

PHD-DESIGN Home

PHD-DESIGN Home

PHD-DESIGN  2004

PHD-DESIGN 2004

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: My thoughts

From:

Dag H <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Dag H <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:21:31 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (180 lines)

Dear Ken and others!

If we see "this" from an other point!
One of the design problems is the plagiarist, the people - company, 
that are steeling a designers piece of work.
Haw do we know how is behind the product, the graphic piece of work, 
the e-mail ore even a person (What can you do with surgery!?).
In the Swedish television they have presented a program about design 
and Form (In Swedish: "Bästa formen") The last program was about 
plagiarism and haw to deal with that. They informed the us that Great 
Britain is dealing strongly with that.
In a more philosophic way how is how and what is what!?
Are this a design problem. Are design about making "fakes" ore is it 
about promoting the "real".
The indignation from some of the participants on the list point out a 
symptom: "Wee do not have control!"
Again who is sending the e-mail?
My opinion are that we as ordinary people, consumers, also have a 
responsibility. Always ask the question: "is this real", "is this 
true", "haw do I know".
What I mean to say is that also the "buyer" has a responsibility when 
it comes to plagiarism.
The reaction on the list is clear, we want to know how is how.
In that respect design has to be understandable and clear!
So Ken, you have giving al of us a very realistic example on the 
problem, thank you!

I have the some opinion as Rosan Chow, Ken please continue to be on the 
list, pleas make us be aware on the facts that  the world are real even 
if it seam's to be a fake!

Regards
Dag

Dag Holmgren, Professor and Designer SID,
School of Engineering
Box 1026
SE-551 11 Jönköping
Tel+46 36 15 64 23
Fax +46 36 34 03 75
Mobil +46 705 30 21 90
e-mail: [log in to unmask]

15 dec 2004 kl. 21.02 skrev Ken Friedman:

> Dear All,
>
> The posts of the last few days and a question directed to me leave me
> feeling I ought to make a brief response.
>
> On October 21, I apologized to the list and I wrote an explanation.
>
> My experience gives me much to reflect on. I was not mindful. I
> should have thought more deeply and reflectively before taking this
> action. This was not research, it was not a carefully considered
> ploy, and it was not an experiment. I created what would have been
> called a pen name (nom de plume) in another context. I created a
> false identity, a voice, or a persona. I would not dignify my
> creation with a label as grand as "net persona" or "avatar." I
> thought of this creation as I would have thought of a pen name in the
> era of paper communication.
>
> This is where the problem comes in.
>
> We are a community because we participate in dialogue together. We
> use a technology that brings us closer together than paper might do.
> We participate in a time frame that would never have been possible on
> paper. We maintain nearly instant communication despite our global
> geographic range. Many of us know each other, and we have many sets
> of relations.
>
> All of this gives rise to a sense of community, and this sense of
> community makes an invented voice inappropriate in the context of our
> list community.
>
> I did not reflect deeply enough on these issues. I used a pen name to
> solve what I considered a problem. In doing so, I created another
> problem, perhaps a series of problems, with nested and recursive
> difficulties hidden layered within them.
>
> At one point, someone posing as "Alan Sokal" asked whether Cindy and
> I might be the same person. Both "Cindy" and I received off-list
> queries on this question. I bought a little time with a misleading
> answer and then I posted an explanation and apology.
>
> It may seem inappropriate, but I distinguish between the deception of
> using a pen name and the act of lying. Under my pen name, I deceived
> people as to the identity of my authorship. I reinforced that
> deception using my own name. At the same time, nothing in Cindy's
> contributions to the list took place outside the bounds of what I saw
> as acceptable behavior. As Keith and David wrote, the unacceptable
> aspect of this act was deceiving people in a community based on trust.
>
> This was inappropriate.
>
> Explanation is not a justification. I should not have used a created
> voice or pen name on this list.
>
> Again, I apologize to you all for this act.
>
> At some point I may have more to say ... I request your understanding
> for the fact that I want to reflect deeply before I say more.
>
> Rosan asked the list owners for leadership. It seems to me they have
> provided it.
>
> They stated in their post that created voices and noms de plume
> (personas or avatars) are not acceptable on this list.
>
> This is a new ruling. This issue never came up before I announced my
> deception and revealed myself. List owners Keith Russell and David
> Durling have ruled on this issue now.
>
> I agree with their post. I could probably add a few more reasons as
> to why I feel it was a mistake to create a fictitious voice on the
> list. I participate here as Ken Friedman. Given this fact,
> subscribing as a second person through an invented voice was a
> mistake.
>
> Rosan's call for leadership raises two issues. There is a distinction
> between opinions and decisions on list protocol. Rosan's opinion is
> equal to that of any other list member. Where it comes to protocol
> rulings, JISC sets the standards for all JISCMAIL lists. JISC
> delegates full authority for list protocol to JISCMAIL list owners.
> They "own" the list on behalf of JISC.
>
> All of us have the right to an opinion. The list owners have never
> debated that. The incident Rosan mentions involved a protocol ruling,
> not a personal, scholarly, or professional opinion. The protocol
> ruling governed the process of an on-line conference. In that
> context, the owners asked a list member to refrain from list conduct
> that might have been perfectly fine in another context. The list is
> an open forum -- the fact that some activities are not permitted on
> certain occasions does not change the quality of the list as an open
> forum.
>
> In this case, the list owners have given the leadership that Rosan
> requests. They have now ruled that created voices are not acceptable
> on PhD-Design.
>
> For my part, I agree entirely with Keith and David's letter. While
> the social, cultural, rhetorical, and design issues embedded in the
> process of creating and activating a voice are fascinating, my
> primary response is as a person who created such a voice in an
> inappropriate context.
>
> This was a mistake. I regret it.
>
> Before ending, I will answer the question Alec asked about what I
> would have done if I discovered that someone had addressed me through
> an avatar or fictitious person. It happened here on the list. I can
> answer by pointing to the list archives.
>
> On October 18, a list member writing as the physicist "Alan Sokal"
> posted the query on my identity. The post came from a false email
> address attributed to the UN arms inspector "Hans Blix." Since I knew
> the real Alan Sokal did not write this, I knew I was answering a
> fictitious person. I have read several of his books and articles and
> some years ago, I exchanged letters with him. The style was not his.
> Based on orthographic style and language patterns, I have my own
> ideas concerning the real identity of the person who posted the
> query. Perhaps one day our "Alan Sokal" will step forward to discuss
> his or her part in these events.
>
> As it is, I did not worry about the real authorship of the query. The
> question was reasonable. I treated it respectfully and I gave a full
> and honest answer to the list.
>
> How would I have treated this in other circumstances? I appreciated
> what Susan wrote about me. I hope that I would act appropriately in
> the circumstances that might emerge.
>
> For now, I hope you will accept my apologies and accept my decision
> to say no more at this time.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Ken Friedman
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager