|
Post by Jeff on Aug 19, 2005 9:33:40 GMT -5
I started back to work. Several meetings, getting everything ready for students on Monday, etc...
|
|
|
Post by Jeff on Aug 26, 2005 0:32:27 GMT -5
Week 20: 2,396 posts in 369 topics from 25 members. Another slow week, only 50 posts. On the other hand, a few of them were from David!
|
|
|
Post by Jeff on Sept 1, 2005 22:24:52 GMT -5
Week 21: 2,494 posts in 392 topics by 25 members.
We got close to 100 posts this week, thanks in large part to the return of Thanin.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff on Sept 8, 2005 22:58:38 GMT -5
Week 22: 2,669 posts in 424 topics by 25 members.
Back up to speed this week!
|
|
|
Post by Jeff on Sept 16, 2005 0:32:32 GMT -5
Week 23: 2,833 posts in 460 topics from 26 members.
New silmultaneous login record: 9 members online at once on the 10th.
Welcome aboard Cory!
|
|
|
Post by Jeff on Sept 22, 2005 23:13:46 GMT -5
Week 24: 2,942 posts in 481 topics from 26 members.
Movin' right along (dooga dum, dooga dum)
|
|
|
Post by Jeff on Sept 30, 2005 0:19:17 GMT -5
Week 25: 3,087 posts in 514 topics from 26 members.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff on Oct 7, 2005 3:59:38 GMT -5
Week 26: 3,225 Total Posts in 535 Total Topics from 27 members.
Should we celebrate? It's our 6th month anniversay.
|
|
|
Post by Thanin on Oct 8, 2005 1:03:16 GMT -5
I celebrated by enjoying my EQ raid a little more that night. We beat Uqua and now have Qvic access!! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Jeff on Oct 10, 2005 14:32:02 GMT -5
Both publicly and privately, a number of you have expressed to me misgivings and annoyance about the board. No one has told me exactly what the problem is, but I’d like to talk about it. My guess is that whereas the original Disjunction was about collaboration and unity, we seem to be much more confrontational now. The tenor of our discussions is more about achieving or manufacturing a unity of vision than trying to find the pre-existing unity in our individual visions. This has created a pressure to conform that was not present in Disjunction. I must admit, that I am responsible for this tone to a large extent. Because I philosophize for a living, I am used to debate and argument. But these haven’t been the hallmarks of most of our interactions in the past. Rather, we used to talk in tones that attempted to lovingly save what could be saved from each of our pasts. I apologize for this, but I don’t know exactly what to do about it other than (a) not posting as much as I do or (b) not exposing my usual modes of thought on the board. I am willing to try either one, or an alternative strategy of your devising, if you guys think it will help things around here.
I realize that I am not completely to blame for this. I am not trying to claim the praise or blame for what this board has become, but I would like to make it better. I would like to see everyone happy about what goes on here, and eventually, I would like for all of us to feel—something I never doubted about our Disjunction project—that everyone has a home here no matter what she happens to believe.
Any thoughts or suggestions?
Jeff
|
|
|
Post by Thanin on Oct 10, 2005 15:36:40 GMT -5
My guess is that whereas the original Disjunction was about collaboration and unity, we seem to be much more confrontational now. The tenor of our discussions is more about achieving or manufacturing a unity of vision than trying to find the pre-existing unity in our individual visions. This has created a pressure to conform that was not present in Disjunction. I must admit, that I am responsible for this tone to a large extent. Because I philosophize for a living, I am used to debate and argument. But these haven’t been the hallmarks of most of our interactions in the past. .. seriously? We've been alienating people for a good 20 years and counting. There are many people who hate the 'pawhuska group'. I think, at it's core, we've always elevated ourselves above, well, the rest of the world. I don't think this has a quick fix. We bonded through mutual exclusion from society, and we've yet to leave that mentality. Well, I think we're not so much like that when we're on our own or around 'other people', but when we interact with each other, it's back to business as usual. I dunno, candy-coat it however you want, but I think that’s what it boils down to. I think the only real way to change it or cure it is to stop interacting. We’re in our mid twenties to mid thirties... like it or not, when we interact, this is who we are.
|
|
|
Post by x on Oct 10, 2005 15:54:59 GMT -5
you think we stop interacting with one another?
|
|
|
Post by Thanin on Oct 10, 2005 16:45:35 GMT -5
Well, Malcolm X fan, no that’s not what I’m trying to say, I just think that any attempt to change this will end up in the board being totally abandoned. It would be a lie. While I think the board gives way to more aggressive conversations, it does more or less reflect how we really are when dealing with each other. And I think the conversations being more aggressive than they might be face to face are a natural byproduct of all message board activity… though we’ve always been confrontational like this. If you’ve ever been to a Bushman party, well, this fact has been displayed on several occasions.
|
|
|
Post by Thanin on Oct 10, 2005 16:57:02 GMT -5
How about this Jeff, just be less inciting on topics. Your approach seems to be, 'Here! This idea/belief is in your face! Deal with it or let my obviously antagonizing statements concerning this subject stand uncontested!' Maybe by just making your hooks to get others to play less sharp, it will solve the problem. Of course theres the danger of going too subtle, causing the posts to be ignored with no one will say anything.
It's a fine line, yo.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff on Oct 10, 2005 17:11:49 GMT -5
That did seem to be a factor in the Hitler was a vegetarian thread, one that we've happily abandoned now. My whole idea with the title was just to get people to read it and respond. But you're right: Why try so hard? It's as if I lacked faith in what we are doing here, so I had to incite you guys. I can tell you that I've learned my lesson. Is this what you mean?
|
|
|
Post by Tyler on Oct 10, 2005 17:26:47 GMT -5
Wait, Hitler was a vegetarian?
|
|
|
Post by Thanin on Oct 10, 2005 17:41:38 GMT -5
Jeff,
I think that's what I mean, I guess. I think the person who isn't happy with the 'anger up the blood' kind of threads should be the one to comment. I'm just guessing at what the problem is.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff on Oct 11, 2005 0:35:38 GMT -5
There are many people who hate the 'pawhuska group'.
I either never knew this or never believed it. I figured that we provoked two kinds of response: friendship or indifference. I can't imagine anyone going out of their way to hate us! Mostly I just thought they rolled their eyes or smiled.
How did I miss this?
|
|
|
Post by Tyler on Oct 11, 2005 8:27:58 GMT -5
Who hates us? If you can't supply that information, at least tell me why.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff on Oct 13, 2005 23:37:02 GMT -5
Week 27: 3,367 total posts in 573 topics from 27 members.
Gotta say: I spend way too much time on the board. But I am so happy that we found this new way to communicate!
|
|