>> The absence of Focus
>> is so conspicuous that members of the List make their presence on and off.
>> I have seen so many messages as evidence to this effect.
maybe this is true for others, but not for me. since I first joined there
have been good bits and boring bits from my point of view but that's true
of most things...
my approach is to scan, but then I'm a very fast reader, even on a screen,
so this might not suit everyone...
if the search functions in eudora and similar software were a bit better
we could use key word searches to scan, or maybe do something clever with
subject headings...the problems is were all on different platforms, but
maybe someone reading this knows some hackers who could modify our
software [who doesn't use either a mac or windows 95 or 3.1? I guess
there aren't many of us on different platforms, but tell me if I'm
wrong...]
>Perhaps it's time for some discussion about the purpose of this list,
>about our purpose here.
maybe, but I'm happy with things as they are in all their
diversity...[good grief, I've just voted for status quo... :-) ]
>From the beginning it has been clear that LO is not something to be
>controled, managed, or driven by objectives.
- agree
>Early on, I was concerned
>about getting the conversation started. I tried several different
>initiatives... None of my attempts
>worked. Then someone (thank you!) said, "It a real party, we'd introduce
>ourselves. I'll start..." and the conversation has been very dynamic ever
>since.
- I think that's the key, for me the relevant metaphor is a party, not
running in real time[-asynchronous], where/were you can pick up on any
thread when you like [almost]
>I don't think this facility, this loose collection of 2000 very diverse
>people, can focus too closely...
agree
>Or work to very specific objectives
agree
>conversation here will be beneficial to a lot of people if it is both:
>
> a) sufficiently on-topic so that people selecting LO out of the 20,000
>different internet discussions will find a high "signal to noise ratio;"
>and
> b) sufficiently wide-ranging so that readers find it stimulating and
>interesting.
agree
>In my activities as host, I try to nudge things to be in a safe zone
>between being too narrow and too scattered. Our focus, to me, is learning
>organizations... Some of our best threads, in my view, have originated at
>the periphery of our topic area, not at the center.
which in complexity terms is 'edge of chaos' and boundary...
apologies for a terse bitty response - I'm up against a book deadline,
until october...
keep up the good work rick
--from Arthur Battram, organiser of 'Tools for Learning', assisting local authorities to apply complexity concepts to learning apb@cityplex.demon.co.uk "complexity is in here... and simplicity is out there...if we want it to be..."
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>