UAA01762
Sender: owner-lilasquad@venus.co.uk
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: lilasquad@moq.org
Not a lot of discussion of the ground rules these past two weeks. I hope
that means everyone is in general agreement with them. I myself have been
quiet because I've been in bed with some kind of virus in my intestines all
week. I am feeling better now, however, and it's almost time to get going
on our slow reading project.
Here's what I've heard so far ...
(1) Miv says two weeks/chapter is too short, three weeks is better. Lee
counters that some chapters will take longer, some will be shorter.
I tend to agree with Lee that the chapters will take differing lengths of
time. The system I proposed was that we set the "default" discussion period
to two weeks and then if you believe that the coming chapter looks like it
will take more or less time, send me an e-mail with your vote for your
recommended number of weeks. If the majority of people e-mail me by 0:00
GMT Saturday prior to the discussion period, I'll use my discretion to
lengthen or shorten the discussion period, as the majority wills. Since
I've been out of sorts this week and not said anything during our start-up
period, I'll extend that period for Chapter 1 to 0:00 GMT Monday, April 15.
(a) If you think the default discussion period should be changed, send your
vote for your recommended number of weeks to me. If a majority does not
appear on the plus or minus side, it'll remain at two weeks.
(b) If you believe that spending one week on Chapter 1 is too short (recall
that I thought the first three chapters, which have already been discussed
on MOQ_Focus, should be alotted less time), send your vote for your
recommended number of weeks to me. Miv indicated one week was too short,
Lee countered that those involved in the previous discussion might be
bored. If a majority does not favor extending the time, it'll remain at one
week.
(c) If you have a cleverer way of changing the amount of time sent on a
chapter, send that to me for consideration.
(2) Andreas says that the barriers to entry into the discussion list should
be lower. Specifically, one shouldn't have to have ready *ZMM* or *Lila*
prior to the current slow reading.
I have no objection to removing the requirement from the charter. It's
there currently because the charter for this group is modelled on the
charter from the previous two listservs and our goal in those forums was to
make sure people participating in those discussions had at least read the
material before they spouted off. We had experienced Internet discussions
where people who had not even read the material would distract from the
discussion by posting messages based on second-hand knowledge and
guesswork. However, since this group is all about actually reading the
material and reading it with a fresh mind, I can see that this requirement
doesn't make much sense. If anyone can make an argument for keeping the
requirement, I'm happy to entertain that, but otherwise I think it makes
more sense to remove it. Thanks, Andreas.
(3) Lee recommends that "if people find a particular issue interesting and
want to 'pursue topics that do not arise from the current chapter' then the
MOQ Discussion group would be the place to thrash out those ideas without
irritating those in LilaSquad."
An excellent suggestion, Lee, and one with which I wholeheartedly concur.
Judging which topics to let through and which to suggest be moved to
MOQ_Discuss will no doubt be the most difficult part of moderating this
list. I had hoped that more dialogue would emerge during this start-up
phase to help me formulate some more specific decision criteria on this
point. Had I not been sick all this week, I would've prodded earlier for
some ideas from the group. There's still a day and a half for you to put
some ideas out there and I invite you to post any thoughts you have. What
I will say right now is that I will be looking at each point in each post
for its relevance to the current chapter. If you use quotations from the
current chapter, clearly indicate what's your theory/interpretation of
Pirsig as distinct from what he himself says, and show how Pirsig's work
relates to what you're saying, making the connection easy for me and
everyone else to see, I'll pass your message through quickly. If I have to
return to the text myself to find the connection, t!
here will be a delay in passing your post through. If I can't find any good
connection, it will be bounced for you to rewrite or post to MOQ_Discuss or
kill it.
(4) Miv suggests that highlights from the previous discussion of Chapters
1-3 be posted during our current discussions of those chapters. Lee
counters that this might slow down discussion too much.
I have no problem with members of the group posting "highlights" of the
previous discussion within the new discussion. I don't want to see
wholesale reposting of previous discussions, however. Those posts were
generated in a different context from our current discussion and will not
be necessarily applicable. What I'd prefer to see is intelligent "quoting"
from previous work as it applies to our current dialogue.
(5) Andreas wants to see a certain naivete, playfulness, and acceptance of
mistakes in our project. Lee concurs.
So do I. I will strive to keep this in mind when moderating the group and I
hope members will when writing posts, as well. It'll be very easy for this
list to become just another forum for the trading of pet theories and
repetition of entrenched ideas. It is my hope that if we really take the
slow reading project seriously, and actually attend to the text itself, we
can avoid this trap and instead join Pirsig on his voyage of discovery by
having a meaningful dialogue on his work.
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jan 17 2002 - 13:08:32 GMT