I think I'm right in saying, Frances, that a number of Group Councillors are
simply nominated by their committees, so the number of direct "votes" for
these Councillors is indeed low. But if you are talking about National
Councillors, I think every one of them received well over twice the number
of votes as there are members of this list.
I don't think anyone has mentioned the small number of subscribers in a
condescending manner. But I think it would be so much better if we could
increase the numbers by an order of magnitude. There is currently no
electronic way of consulting the membership as a whole on issues, and I
think there ought to be.
******************************************
Prof Bruce Royan www.concurrentcomputing.co.uk
41 Greenhill Gardens, Edinburgh, EH10 4BL, UK
+44 131 4473151 +44 77 1374 4731
******************************************
-----Original Message-----
From: Chartered Library and Information Professionals
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Frances Hendrix
Sent: 13 July 2006 11:46
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: List Closure
What a useful and interesting addition to the debate, thank you
I was thinking about this earlier today. Much has been made by some, in
a condescending manner, that there are only so many users of this list
BUT if memory serves me right the number isn't much below the number who
voted certain Council members onto council?
f
-----Original Message-----
From: Chartered Library and Information Professionals
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Woodley Zena (RQ8) Mid
Essex Hospital
Sent: 13 July 2006 10:36
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: List Closure
I have followed this debate with interest. I agree there's a place for
communites of practice, but am concerned this is putting people into
too-closely defined areas. Thinking, and looking, outside the box is
one of the great strengths of this profession. That, and a certain
bloody-mindedness!
Some members of this list have rebuked others for expressing an opinion
unpalatable to them - "Sir, I disagree profoundly with what you say, but
I will defend to the death your right to say it". I am a passionate
believer in free speech; it seems to me that many of the recent laws of
this country are - slowly but surely - eroding that freedom. I do not
think my Institute should be a part of this.
I understand the Institute's wish to disengage from 'Lis-Cilip'. Rather
like certain information trends within the NHS, one is being directed
toward to a particular source for discussion, and one is invited to
create a personal profile accordingly. They see this as a focus on
member benefits - and what benefit is there in something that's freely
available to all? I would wish to continue this List - albeit under
another name - for I think it serves two functions: as a (necessarily
sometimes acidic) debating arena; and as an arena which can engage all
those (many) individuals who work in information, but who do not see
membership of this Institute as a necessary part of their
professionalism. Cilip may be exasperated by them, but they should not
be preventing communication between members & non-members - quite the
reverse.
And at a time when blandness rules, and we are ever mindful of not
upsetting anyone, ever, I confess to enjoying some of the interchanges.
I am an adult, & know well enough that not everyone likes me. I've
learnt to live with it: if I want endless love, I'll get a dog.
Cheers!
Zena Woodley B.A.(Joint Hons), MCLIP
Library Resources Manager
The Warner Library
Broomfield Hospital
Chelmsford CM1 7ET
T: 01245-514310
e : [log in to unmask]
"You can push and you can shove - but I'm demmed if I'll be druve"
This e-mail is confidential and privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please accept our apologies; please do not disclose, copy or
distribute information in this e-mail or take any action in reliance on
its contents: to do so is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
Please inform us that this message has gone astray before deleting it.
Thank you for your co-operation.
|