From: GBurch1@aol.com
Date: Sun Feb 28 1999 - 07:25:22 MST
The subject of maintaining focus on the open extropians list has come up once
again, and rightly so. As Brian Atkins has pointed out, extropian ideas and
values are increasingly entering the mainstream and mentions of ExI and this
list are appearing more and more outside our community. In response to this
recent discussion, I would like to make a few observations.
First, I would urge all list subscribers to PLEASE BEAR IN MIND THE SUBJECT
MATTER OF CORE INTEREST TO THE BROADER COMMUNITY REPRESENTED BY THE LIST
SUBSCRIBERS AS A WHOLE. This is a list for discussion of transhumanism and
extropianism. There are some fine examples of postings in this milieu: As I
pointed out recently, Doug Skrecky's and Anders Sandberg's work in collecting
and publishing here items of recent research in science and technology aimed
at augmentation of the human animal and the discussions that have gown out of
these postings are the kinds of things we have all come here to find. Other
examples of recent discussions that are, in my opinion, clearly within the
core area of interest to transhumanists and extropians include the thread
about the role of spirituality in transhumanism and extropiansim started by
Natasha V. More and the discussion of the FAQ edited by Nick Bostrom.
Second, extended discussions of specific issues that may go into considerable
depth are, in my opinion, certainly appropriate here. Such discussions may
explore particular issues into avenues that may not at first seem relevant to
the core ideas and values of transhumanism and extropianism. However, it is
incumbent on every poster to work at maintaining relevance to the main topics
of interest to the list's subscribers as a whole. As Winston Churchill once
observed, "A FANATIC IS SOMEONE WHO WILL NOT CHANGE THE SUBJECT". If you have
any doubt about whether this observation applies to you personally, please
reread Sir Winston's aphorism again. And again. Thank you.
If a thread has drifted far off an original item of interest to transhumanists
and extropians generally, PLEASE consider taking the discussion into private
off-list correspondence or, perhaps, creating a list specifically for the
discussion of that topic. There are many examples of such very worthwhile
"daughter lists" that have been spawned by material that has been first
discussed here, both sponsored by ExI and otherwise. With the development of
services such as "OneList", creation of "daughter lists" has become easier
than ever. In short, before you post the 125th message on a topic, think
about who has maintained interest by responding to your posts and consider
taking the discussion into private correspondence or onto a separate, special-
interest list.
With all that in mind, let me echo Brian's observation about the value of this
open forum as a place where newcomers to the ideas and values of transhumanism
and extropianism gather important first impressions about our community. List
subscription rates have been consistently much higher in the last year or so
than in previous times, but so has list turnover. The more this list offers
high-quality discussion about the main themes of transhumanism and
extropianism, the more successful it will be in building the kind of long-term
cultural change that is one of ExI's main goals. This is an open and informal
forum, and I, for one, want to keep it that way: I personally welcome and
enjoy humor, serendipitous cross-posting, extended open discussion and simple
socializing within our community here. But we must all ask each other to also
THINK about the impression our discussions have on the wider world before we
post.
Now, as someone who has been on the list for some time, but not since its
inception, let me offer some observations about the discussion of custom-built
list software and schemes for collaborative filtering. The original list was
run on a piece of software written for the extropians group that was, by the
standards of its day, pretty sophisticated. The list also had a charter that
attempted to implement extropian ideas about self-governance. In my opinion,
neither element of the list's initial constitution realized their full
potential because the community could not economically support a sufficient
level of on-going technical support. Despite its creator's best efforts, the
software required maintenance beyond a level possible with part-time,
volunteer efforts. Likewise, the "political" aspects of the initial
constitution of the list required more effort to maintain than the body of
subscribers was able to invest in it.
Neither of these observations leads to the conclusion that elaborate
collaborative filtering mechanisms or privately produced list constitutions
are a bad idea. However, I believe that the experience of the original list
constitution does teach that it is difficult to maintain the good intentions
and good ideas of original conception without on-going economic support
sufficient to make sure the right people are able to devote time to issues
that arise WHEN they arise. No matter how skillfully written, custom-built
software has to be maintained and upgraded. Who will do this? Most
importantly, who will do it WHEN IT NEEDS TO BE DONE? If it takes even a
couple of days for a fix to a disabling breakdown of the list software to be
accomplished, the list community can quickly lose cohesion. Through
absolutely no one's fault, this is what precipitated the change to less
sophisticated off-the-shelf list software. Likewise, distributed private
dispute resolution to maintain a preconceived list charter requires the
devotion of time by the disputants and arbiters, IN A TIMELY FASHION: One of
the primary ingredients of good justice is swift justice. The fact that many
of the list's original subscribers are still here is evidence that people
prefer some community to an ideal community that can't execute its essential
functions in a timely fashion.
Which leads to practical considerations raised by the proposals that have been
discussed since Brian's post. Right now, ExI maintains this list with donated
server capacity and minimal personal effort. Using custom built software
would presumably require more effort on the part of our current host, or some
other host. Who will support that effort economically and with devotion of
time and effort? Any current volunteer effort, no matter how well-
intentioned, is subject to the contingencies of one or few people's personal
lives over time. What seems like a minor commitment today may become
unworkable as jobs and life commitments change.
If these issues could be sorted out in a manner that offered some guaranty of
continuity to the list in the face of the kinds of contingencies that would
inevitably arise, I'd be all for adopting a more sophisticated collaborative
filtering scheme for the list as a whole. In the meantime, though, I'd advise
caution in making significant change in the constitution of the list.
I'll close my little sermon by once again offering my personal gratitude to
the folks who have made this a rich and lively forum for many years.
Greg Burch <GBurch1@aol.com>----<burchg@liddellsapp.com>
Attorney ::: Director, Extropy Institute ::: Wilderness Guide
http://users.aol.com/gburch1 -or- http://members.aol.com/gburch1
"Good ideas are not adopted automatically. They must
be driven into practice with courageous impatience."
-- Admiral Hyman G. Rickover
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:03:11 MST