[iDC] The Ethics of Participation

[Trebor Scholz]

Hi Keith,

Thanks for your comments and many thoughtful contributions to this list. It's good to be reminded if we go on for too long. Criticism is valuable. But at times people roughen each other
up, not entirely in the name of dialectics or high standards. Other readers start feeling intimidated and stop contributing simply because they do not have time for the tough guys. Conflict
is desirable (and even crucial) as long as it is aimed at arguments. 

Keith Hart wrote:
"we should keep lists like this one going rather than sell out to the forces of capital concentration."

Personally, I enjoy long texts on lists even if they are not professionally safe, distilled and mulled over for months or years. That's the strength of discourse networks: people don't have to
wait for two years until the book or print journal is out and the burning issues are already history. I think it's hard to make assumptions about what people do or do not like. I agree,
however, that long essays are not conducive to response writing. Short, provocative posts are much more likely to trigger participation. And reciprocity, especially for people who post for
the first time, encourages continued engagement.  

However, contrary to your reading, I don't have problems with periods of silence on this or other lists. In fact, I think that a month of high traffic followed by "time out" is rather a sign of a
maturing network. Traffic alone is not an indication of a lively group. Fewer posts once in a while do not mean that subscribers don't read, bookmark, or forward posts. There are many
forms of participation even if not all of them equally contribute to communal value. 

Best,
Trebor





>Trebor,
>
>I opened your message thinking that it would be about the ethics 
>of
>participation on this list. After all it is not long since you sent one
>lamenting that conversation seemed to have died here. As it is, I 
>am
>grateful for the numerous links, but your positive 
>recommendations for an
>e of p could be summarized in a paragraph or less. I wonder how 
>many
>readers would persevere long enough to discover your conclusion: 
>we should
>keep lists like this one going rather than sell out to the forces of
>capital concentration.
>
>I can't help connect this contribution to the energetic thread on
>'continuous partial attention' which I followed with great interest, 
>not
>least as proof that conversation has not died on the list. Your
>introduction of the idea of ethics has nudged me into mentioning 
>something
>that seemed relevant to that thread, but somewhat marginal. I 
>have been
>considering for some time an essay with the title, 'The death of
>reciprocity'. In my time as moderator of a list, one of the most 
>common
>complaints was from members who posted a comment and had 
>no reply. They
>wondered if they had been cut off. I used to say, 'If you stood up 
>in a
>bar and made an uninvited speech of that length, how many 
>people do you
>think would still be listening by the time you reached the end?'
>Techniques of launching a conversation are quite subtle, in this 
>medium or
>any other.
>
>Levi-Strauss said that reciprocity is a human universal. But my 
>bet is
>that it was invented by agricultural societies and lasted only into 
>the
>first stage of industrialization. The age of the internet has more 
>in
>common with foraging societies for whom sharing is an active 
>principle,
>but reciprocity generally is not. So one question might be, Is an 
>ethics
>possible without reciprocity? For surely granting ones attention is 
>not
>usually an ethical matter.
>
>Returning to ethics of lists like this one, my experience as an 
>organizer
>of networks is that people will participate as long as the network 
>gives
>them a chance to do something they can' t do anywhere else. 
>When it fails
>to do so, they leave or just become passive. I gave up berating 
>lapsed
>members with their unethical behaviour in failing to reciprocate 
>the
>opportunity I had given them and learned to live with their 
>temporary
>loyalty.
>
>Fortunately for the list, a number of people have come out of the 
>woodwork
>since New Year to say it does something for them. I guess I must 
>be one of
>them or I wouldn't be here.
>
>Keith
>
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>mail2web - Check your email from the web at
>http://mail2web.com/ .
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>iDC -- mailing list of the Institute for Distributed Creativity 
>(distributedcreativity.org)
>iDC at bbs.thing.net
>http://mailman.thing.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/idc
>
>List Archive:
>http://mailman.thing.net/pipermail/idc/
>
>