Cristiano,
I hope this doesn't feel like I'm chastising you. I'm not. I'm just disagreeing with part of what you wrote. I post a fair amount to this list. I don't know if that makes me part of the "handful of (male) members" that seems to be in control (but I confess to being male even without the parentheses.)
First, I'd like to point out that it is very difficult to find the right balance in a conversation like this. If you are sitting in a room with people you know, it makes sense to say something very short because you'll have instant and, if you're in the right room with the right people, somewhat coherent reply* and the exchange will turn into an actual conversation. You can figure out whether people are understanding what you intend, whether they need help in catching up to the argument you're making, and whether you are boring the hell out of them. (Well, at least sometimes I can figure that out.)
In an asynchronous, indeterminate conversation like a listserv, a brief comment is very likely to be misunderstood, often sinking whatever purpose you hand in posting because people will reply without having the courtesy to read your mind and ask your intent. It's almost a caricature of a face-to-face conversation. A long post is likely to alienate people or just prove to be too much work for the busy people you were hoping to connect with. A short one will be insufficient. If you're talking to 2700 people, whatever tone you set will be wrong for at least a thousand of them. Whatever cultural knowledge you assume is shared will prove to be alien to at least a thousand. We all try to deal with the problem in our own ways.
Ken, for example, takes the responsible route of writing detailed, serious mini essays. I admire his dedication to us. I know him well enough after 25 years of email exchanges to know that what he does is a show of respect for the subject at hand and for us. If it is sometimes like drinking from a firehose, that is sometimes the byproduct of serious discussion. I know he hopes the list will become a serious academic exchange, with short calls and notices sharing space with serious and well-researched position papers. (I think he's also smart enough to know that's highly unlikely to happen.)
Others try to encapsulate their beliefs in short quips. This can be very enjoyable but (at least from my point of view) is generally not very effective.
Others invoke names and subject matter from philosophers to cosmologists, as if assuming that we have all read whatever they mentioned. At least in my case, they are usually wrong but I remind myself that I do not have to read every thread on the list, let alone care about and participate in all of them.
As to people "telling the whole community [1] what we can say, [2] what is natural to feel, [3] what is rational, [4] how we should interpret messages, and [5] what is welcome, [6] more or less implicitly assuming they know better," sort of, I doubt it, yes, of course, and yes--of course.
[1] It is reasonable in any conversation to note when the exchange has drifted away from agreed-upon subject matter or accepted levels of civility. I find it best to attempt to gently steer things back on track before making declarations regarding transgressions but there are cases where gentle steering is too little too late. This is not to say that any individual will have the same judgement on the subject as all others. When there is disagreement, stating "I think you are mistaken" is a good course of action. That's what you've done here and thank you for that (but I think you may be mistaken.))
[2] I don't remember an instance of someone claiming what is natural to feel. Can you give some examples?
[3] Of course people in a conversation about research and related activities will argue about whether something is rational. Claiming that they should not, is very odd, indeed. Assuming that anyone who makes such a claim is right simply because he (male) made the claim would be equally odd. Especially in a group like this one where it is quite unlikely that there will be agreement.
[4] This likely sounds like I'm being snotty but I'm not: I don't know how to interpret your claim that people are telling everyone how they should interpret messages.
[5] See [1] above.
[6] Name a subject and there's someone on this list who knows more abut it than others do. If "knows better" was meant to mean something about social dominance, see [1] and [5.]
I hope I'm not burying the lede here but any conversation will always be shaped by the people conversing. There may be some bit of a Gresham's Law ("bad money drives out good") thing going on but if the conversation is not that way you want it to be, the fact that you have not generally participated in the conversation is a salient fact.
If you (or anyone) are not participating from fear of overly aggressive actions by other players, I will (in honor of the build up to the Stanley Cup), volunteer to be your (or anyone's) hockey goon. If you think someone is high sticking you, email me off list and I will take over the fight for you. The penalty box gives me time to think and I have (at least by US standards) pretty good medical insurance. (Some Warren Zevon for your entertainment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MSfhdJxZ_U ) So don't worry about getting hurt; just try to figure out what Gretzky meant by skating to where the puck is going to be.
*Teena--Please call me out on the implications of "right" and "coherent." Other than this thread, we haven't heard from you in way too long. I miss you.
Gunnar
Gunnar Swanson
East Carolina University
graphic design program
http://www.ecu.edu/cs-cfac/soad/graphic/index.cfm
[log in to unmask]
Gunnar Swanson Design Office
1901 East 6th Street
Greenville NC 27858
USA
http://www.gunnarswanson.com
[log in to unmask]
+1 252 258-7006
> On May 30, 2015, at 5:10 AM, Cristiano Storni <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Dear Prof. Durling,
>
> I just want to thank you very much for your message. I agree with Daria and
> Teena: for each member withdrawing from the list with a public message,
> there are probably dozens who go away silently, and even more who stay away
> from posting for the fear of being 'chastise' in public (posting this
> message is for me an exception).
>
> I am sorry, but I personally believe Filippo's message misses the point
> here because it reaffirms (at least to me) how a handful of (male) members
> sets up the standard by telling the whole community what we can say, what
> is natural to feel, what is rational, how we should interpret messages, and
> what is welcome, more or less implicitly assuming they know better. My
> feeling is that some speak as they own this list. When generosity is
> invoked I wonder if writing very long messages and sharing huge amount of
> resources (which definitely show dedication) is not a way to actually kill
> the conversation, mark the territory, and reaffirm one own superiority. But
> let's not forget, if respect is the point, then I should respect that too...
>
> However, I must say that I thank God I have joined this list after getting
> my PhD because joining any earlier would have been a bit discouraging (but
> maybe it is just me).
>
> Best regards
>
> Cristiano
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
