Steve,
You said:
>This is not meant to replace this net community but to give it a more official
>>footing in the eyes of the RGS etc.>>
I said:
>but could we, at some time in the future, consider the nature of the
>>relationship between the CGF organisation and the net discussion group? Would
>>crit-geog-forum function as a/the medium of communication between the
>>organisation and its members. Or is it envisaged that there will have to be a
>>parallel means of communication/debate for organisation members only?
To which you replied:
>I think you've raised a *very* important point -- there has been
>some/much discussion of the relationship, maybe this is worth airing more
>generally. It'll be interesting to see whether people think that paper kills
>cyberspace
I may be wrong (and maybe I should check the c-g-f archives) but since I
joined the c-g-f discussion group, its identity seems to reside primarily
in debates of institutional issues (other than the very useful information
postings), i.e. Shell/IBG-RGS, the status of critical geography in HE.
Were the embryonic C-G-F "organisation" ("BIG CGF") to adopt c-g-f
discussion group ("small cgf") as its medium of communication, this might
provide a healthy stimulus for DIALOGUE/DEBATE on crit geog issues.
Best regards
Christopher RAY
Centre for Rural Economy
University of Newcastle
Tel: 0191-222-6460 ; Fax: 0191-222-6720
Web site: http://www.ncl/ac/uk/~ncr4/
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|