From: Jeff Davis (jdavis@socketscience.com)
Date: Wed Sep 06 2000 - 13:08:12 MDT
Emlyn talking to himself and someone else says:
>BTW, I didn't find
>anything
>> to disagree with in what you say, so I almost didn't respond. But, then, I
>> thought, should I only reinforce disagreements?
>>
>
>Good effort! That's probably a first for this list. Thanks!
>
>I think a lot of people post good things here, and are discouraged by being
>ignored. I've come to the conclusion that it usually means people agree with
>you. I think I'll try to actually tell people ths more often.
I concur. Perhaps there should be a special subject heading--I suggest
CONC (or perhaps AMEN!)--so that people can support a given point of view
even though they may not, at that moment, have anything to add. It feels
important to me to have a way to experience the wider range of responses to
our inputs: "Is anyone listening? Does anyone care? Does what I think
have any value?"
This medium, while it gives us marvelous new capabilities (cheap, quick,
global reach), is also in many ways, perhaps most ways, still hugely
impoverished. Think about it; it's time-delayed written communication.
(That's a significant step backward from the telephone, which gives you
real time, full spectrum, human-to-human (audio) contact.) Except for
writing, we're all sitting in the silent darkness. There's no "See me,
feel me, touch me, heal me." (Though video and audio will no doubt come on
stream soon.)
Anyway I concur. Discussion ought not, through inadvertance or the quirks
of the medium, favor or overemphasize contention and negativity.
Best, Jeff Davis
"Everything's hard till you know how to do it."
Ray Charles
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:30:49 MST