Print

---

I’d be in favor of this idea Filippo. I know I don’t participate often. One
reason is lack of time to properly contribute to threads that are of
interest. Another reason, well, I too have felt intimidated. However, this
is a rich resource to learn, grow, and even be pointed in the right
direction. I find it hard to search through emails. When there’s been
something I want to cite and forgot to in the moment it appeared, it’s been
a tad cumbersome to find. In any case, Google groups, Slack, Trello, or
Notion may be able to provide smaller spaces, within the large room, to
navigate and enrich a conversation.

Alma

On Sat, Sep 1, 2018 at 12:16 Filippo Salustri <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Heidi et al,
>
> Heidi's ideas are in keeping with my idea of providing easier means to
> distinguish quickly between different kinds of posts.
>
> Here's an analogy:
> As we have it now, we're all in one giant ballroom. Some of us are
> conversing; others are expounding; still others are quietly listening.
> The problems are, as I see it:
> a. in one big space, not everyone can hear what's going on because of the
> general hubbub from all those who are speaking doing so at once;
> b. the general hubbub of one big space can make understanding what any one
> person says difficult; and
> c. some people will not feel comfortable talking in spaces where many, many
> people with many, many different interests may overhear only part of a
> conversation and take the wrong meaning.
>
> I think what might be better is:
> A series of smaller, richly interconnected rooms, though which people can
> move at their leisure. Each room is for some specific topic(s) of
> discussion. Topics can evolve and change as the people in the room change.
> Rooms can be added or removed as needed. People can stay in one room for
> long periods and enjoy deep conversations, or move between various rooms
> gathering a broader but not necessarily deep sense of multiple topics.
> Anyone can move to any room at any time and stay for as long as they like.
>
> It seems to me that the alternative can address all three of the problems
> that see.
>
> Unfortunately, the one way I know of to implement the alternative is with a
> richer discussion forum system than Jiscmail offers. For instance, I'm well
> acquainted with Google Groups. It allows one to develop a set of tags. Tags
> model the notion of rooms in my analogy. There can be tags for specific
> subjects, tags to identify the nature of the post (asking a question,
> seeking references, soliciting opinions, disruptive/innovative ideas,
> random thoughts, etc.) A given post can be multiply tagged. Seeing the tags
> on an incoming email message allows a subscriber to identify what "room"
> that post is being "spoken" in, and decide whether or not that post is of
> interest. One would still only subscribe to a single list, but one could be
> more selective about both audience for one's posts and what one elects to
> read. While tags can be added and removed over time (analogous to
> adding/removing/changing rooms), it would be good to set up an initial set
> of tags that are the most meaningful for participants.
>
> And, of course, all of this depends on whether there's any significant
> enthusiasm for this or some similar idea.
>
> Just 2 more cents.
>
> \V/_  /fas
>
> *Prof. Filippo A. Salustri, Ph.D., P.Eng.*
> Associate Chair, Mechanical Engineering, Ryerson University
> "I do not share your view that the scientist should observe silence in
> political matters." -Albert Einstein
> EMAIL <[log in to unmask]> | WEB <https://deseng.ryerson.ca/~fil/> |
> ORCID
> <https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3689-5112>
>
>
> On Sat, 1 Sep 2018 at 11:05, Heidi Overhill <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > Luke's energy and interest in being useful is very impressive, but
> > Filippo's methodological concerns are perhaps even more so.
> > How about a more organic approach to identifying varying interests in the
> > list?
> > Since there are so many sub-sets of these, perhaps people could give just
> > a bit more detail of their personal backgrounds in either art or science,
> > and the first line of each message clarify its intent, permitting those
> not
> > interested to stop reading right away. Intents might include:
> > Proposal for list modificationComment on design philosophy inviting
> > feedbackRequest for suggestions of related literatureRequest for private
> > conversationDiscussion of PhD curriculumGender inequalityImportance of
> > drawing This proposal would "beta test" the concept that different
> members
> > of the list have different purposes in posting, without investigating the
> > reasons why people do NOT post, which may be positive reasons (shyness,
> bad
> > experiences with criticism, lack of time) or passive (joined the list due
> > only to a mild interest in surveying content from afar).
> > Regarding the importance of the problem of "lack of time," note that I am
> > able to answer these last posts only because I am on temporary sick leave
> > from teaching, and therefore (alas) not embroiled in happy seasonal
> course
> > updating.
> > Happy studies to all,Heidi
> > PhD Candidate, Faculty of Information, University of Toronto (Title:
> > Conceptualizing the Western Domestic Kitchen as a Location for
> > Information)MFA, University of Waterloo (Title: MoME: the Museum of
> Me)Post
> > Graduate Diploma, Royal College of Art (Title: The Function of
> > Decoration)BID, Faculty of Engineering, Carleton University (Title:
> Medical
> > Drug Compliance)
> > Professor, Faculty of Animation, Art and Design, Sheridan College
> > Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning.
> > PS In the interest of keeping the argument flowing, I am not clipping the
> > relevant prior posts.
> >
> >       From: Filippo Salustri <[log in to unmask]>
> >  To: [log in to unmask]
> >  Sent: Saturday, September 1, 2018 8:16 AM
> >  Subject: Re: Discussion about future of the PHD-DESIGN list
> >
> > Luke et al,
> > I would support this effort so long as there was a way to ensure there is
> > broad acceptance of it among the current membership of the list.
> >
> > It seems to me we'd need:
> > * a process to design the constitution, and
> > * a process to "vote" on its adoption.
> >
> > People more cognizant about Jiscmail's rules & policies than me would
> have
> > to be involved from the outset to make sure any hard constraints imposed
> by
> > the platform itself are observed.
> >
> > My greatest interest at this point is in the adoption vote. What
> percentage
> > of the membership would have to vote for the result to count? What
> > percentage of the vote would be needed to adopt the constitution,
> whatever
> > form it may take? Would there be only a single vote, or could a negative
> > vote result in modifications and a second vote on the revised
> constitution?
> > Would that be the only iteration?
> >
> > It seems to me that if we cannot agree on the voting mechanism, then
> > there'd be no point pursuing the constitution itself.
> >
> > Just to kick things off, I'll make a suggestion.
> >
> > Since implementing a constitution would be a really big step for the
> list,
> > I should think a significant majority would be needed. Obviously, the
> vote
> > would be anonymous, but it would have to be rather overwhelming.
> > There's 2 measures that matter: number of votes cast as a fraction of
> total
> > membership, and number of votes in favour of the constitution.
> > I would suggest that given the significance, at least a 2/3's majority of
> > the entire membership could be used.
> > To ensure this, we'd need 82% of all members to vote, and 82% of those
> > voting members to vote FOR the constitution, for a positive outcome. Or,
> > alternatively, if 100% of members vote, then we'd only need 67% to vote
> > 'yes'. In any case, at least 67% of the membership would have to vote for
> > adoption of a constitution to have any chance. Can we expect 67% of the
> > membership to vote?
> >
> > One immediate question is: Is 67% enough? If not, what should it be?
> >
> > I'd further suggest that:
> > * if only between 50% and 67% of the whole list membership vote in
> favour,
> > then this should trigger a revision of the proposed constitution and
> > subsequent re-vote, but
> > * if less than 50% of the entire membership votes in favour, then the
> whole
> > constitution thing should be cancelled.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > \V/_  /fas
> >
> > *Prof. Filippo A. Salustri, Ph.D., P.Eng.*
> > Associate Chair, Mechanical Engineering, Ryerson University
> > "I do not share your view that the scientist should observe silence in
> > political matters." -Albert Einstein
> > EMAIL <[log in to unmask]> | WEB <https://deseng.ryerson.ca/~fil/> |
> > ORCID
> > <https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3689-5112>
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 1 Sep 2018 at 01:56, Luke Feast <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > > Dear colleagues,
> > >
> > > Several list members have put forward suggestions about how to improve
> > the
> > > PHD-DESIGN list. It makes sense to me that discussion should start to
> > shift
> > > from how the list is to how it ought to be. I think that a robust
> > > discussion about the future of the list should include the views of the
> > > list owners. While I respect their decision to refrain from
> contributing
> > so
> > > far, I would welcome their input in the discussion of the future of the
> > > list.
> > >
> > > To contribute to discussion about the future, I am putting forward the
> > > proposal that we should implement a process to design a constitution
> for
> > > the PHD-Design list. By constitution I mean the system through which a
> > > people governs itself.
> > >
> > > In my view the PHD-Design list needs a written constitution – something
> > > short and easy to understand, which defines the relationship between
> the
> > > main stakeholders, that sets out how power is to be used, and codifies
> > what
> > > are the basic rights and freedoms that all list members are entitled
> to.
> > A
> > > short written constitution that is easy to access and use would inform
> > both
> > > current and new list members about what the PHD-Design list is and how
> it
> > > works.
> > >
> > > Current list culture is mostly based on an indeterminate arrangement of
> > > unwritten norms and conventions. This would be fine if there was
> > persuasive
> > > evidence that the current situation was ideal. No doubt a considerable
> > > number of list members believe that there is nothing wrong and there is
> > no
> > > need for change. I disagree. The recent discussions about list culture,
> > the
> > > discussion of the recent poll, and the collection of statements that
> Ken
> > > Friedman recently posted indicate that we need greater integrity,
> > > transparency and participation in how power is structured and used in
> the
> > > list.
> > >
> > > In my view, at minimum a constitution for the PHD-Design list should
> tell
> > > us:
> > > * how the powers of JiscMail, the list owners and the list members are
> > > defined and organized
> > > * how decisions about the functioning of the list are to be made and by
> > > whom
> > > * what mechanisms exist to promote integrity, transparency and
> > > participation
> > > * how human rights and rights of minorities are protected
> > > * how the constitution should be amended to balance entrenching core
> > > values and letting future generations of list members adapt the list to
> > > their needs.
> > >
> > > In my view, if we design the right kind of constitution then the
> prospect
> > > of better decision-making and a more inclusive list culture increases.
> > >
> > > Best wishes,
> > > Luke
> > >
> > > Luke Feast, Ph.D. | Senior Lecturer | Faculty of Design and Creative
> > > Technologies | Auckland University of Technology | New Zealand | Email
> > > [log in to unmask]
> > >
> > >
> > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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
> > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> >
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
-- 
*Alma Hoffmann*

Assistant Professor
VAB 348

501 North University Blvd
Department of Visual Arts
University of South Alabama
Mobile, AL 36688

p. 251-461-1437


-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------