So we're off, but not as quickly as I'd hoped. The format is going well, as everyone is using the standard form and being fairly polite to each other, though, I must say, the debate is a bit tame. The difficulty is that the consensus statements being produced are just plain boring! For instance, the "City Design for Chumps" topic has ended up with "All aspects of city development should be designed or redesigned with the final objective of reducing the necessity of personal automobiles." Pleeeeasse! Perhaps the issue here is that people are hestitant to get out there and throw in some serious detail into their rebuttals so as not to get their noses bitten off. But people, the devil is in the details! That's where it gets interesting, where we can hash out how we want this world to look like, one topic at a time, all consensus-like. I, for one, am going to get back in there and put some controversial details in, so people can actually start disagreeing a bit!
En garde!
Tim
Monday, December 15, 2008
Saturday, December 6, 2008
The Concept
Hey y'all,
I've created a wiki (there's a link to it on the right side!) to try and see if it's possible to have polite discourse over the wiki format. Basically, how it works is this. Someone starts with a topic and a statement on that topic (hopefully an inflammatory yet what you see as true statement, they work best!). Then who ever sees it, and disagrees or thinks it is missing an important point must either:
After a massive creative endeavor, at the end of it all, we should have a collective statement on a topic that is amenable to all involved! This is the experiment.
I'll be monitoring the site so that I can see if people are following these simple rules. Yes, that's fascist, but let me put it this way. If you come into this space, you have agreed to respect the rights of others in the community to an opinion, so if you disrespect that, you should not be able to contribute to this community. Let's come to a consensus!
Tim
I've created a wiki (there's a link to it on the right side!) to try and see if it's possible to have polite discourse over the wiki format. Basically, how it works is this. Someone starts with a topic and a statement on that topic (hopefully an inflammatory yet what you see as true statement, they work best!). Then who ever sees it, and disagrees or thinks it is missing an important point must either:
- Leave the sentence there, and place a sentence above it that is modified so that the new sentence both reflects what you see as your view, and what you see as the view of the original sentence.
- If you can't make the above work (they just seem too incompatible), put your sentence above the one below, and write "Incompatible". Someone else will attempt to merge them!
After a massive creative endeavor, at the end of it all, we should have a collective statement on a topic that is amenable to all involved! This is the experiment.
I'll be monitoring the site so that I can see if people are following these simple rules. Yes, that's fascist, but let me put it this way. If you come into this space, you have agreed to respect the rights of others in the community to an opinion, so if you disrespect that, you should not be able to contribute to this community. Let's come to a consensus!
Tim
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
