[Air-l] list behavior

[Heidelberg, Chris]

Hey Christian:

I understand that his information is not necessarily new, it is simply
insightful. Re-read my post. When I am not working in the academic and
research side of communications, I work with the real
interesting/troubled folks (some are newsmakers, some are decision
makers) in the worlds of media/politics/academia. The individual in
question is no more abnormal than most of these folks. While I may not
choose to act as he does, I believe that the people on the board will
make a decision about him and that will be the end of that. I troubled
by the sheer hostility overall that has recently taken hold on this
board on both sides. Please do not discount one of my prior text without
considering it in its full context. I am not looking for a silk purse; I
am simply astute enough to separate parts of the message from the
messenger who is obviously getting the desired effect of anger and its
working. I suggest that you folks settle it offline. What I am
commenting on is the mix of these worlds from the very beginning of
communications technology and how it does not get the full exposure that
it deserves. This is why I took my research in another direction than
most and concentrated on applied practitioners who are implementing
emerging technologies with traditional technologies to see how the
technology has truly become an extension of our minds (McLuhan, 1967)
and the entire concept of the global village. I also would beg to differ
with you only on a nuance of this area of study. I would suggest that
while the research has been there only partially because no one truly
knew that some of these new technologies would blossom. The nature of my
job, not unlike many of yours, is to employ these technologies in an
ethical and responsible manner on a daily basis to world; however, I am
convinced that the technologies are moving faster than laws, lawmakers,
academia and copyright holders can keep pace. Further, I maintain that
despite the existence of the research these technologies have not been
fully embraced by the Academy as a whole until now when the Academy is
being dragged kicking and screaming in too many cases. If the Academy is
worried about commercial interests having too much control, they are
more than a half century too late; however, the Academy as a whole can
start taking stances like Stanford is doing with its doctors to limit
the power of the drug companies and offering iTunesU. If the object of
the Academy is inspire and promote the free flow of ideas and ultimately
learning, we as members must set our personal preferences aside at times
to promote ideas to the people. When we in the US live in a society
where only half of the people vote, most can be easily fooled by
deceptive corporate ads, and most people trying to become educated will
be in debt before their lives truly begins, we all have a problem in the
Academy. Why? Because it is our job to continue Diogenes quest of
searching for the truth. We have created whole classes of people who
have not been taught critical thinking at a higher level and it shows
when our leaders in business, government and academia can tell us almost
anything and get away with it. I see things in the theoretical and
applied worlds and I am suggesting that without the back and forth
transfer of theoretical and applied concepts the academy will continue
to produce drones, not free thinkers and that is extremely dangerous in
the world that we live. We have to adapt and overcome the present system
of education and transform it into a more collaborative and
individualistically system where students can share information, work
together and also obtain individual enrichment through the incorporation
of media technologies and techniques. Hey let's get back to the research
and sharing. I have met some truly brilliant people through this
organization and I value what I have learned and shared over time. We
have real issue to examine and solve. Let's work together!

-----Original Message-----
From: air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org
[mailto:air-l-bounces at listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of Christian Nelson
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 7:21 AM
To: air-l at listserv.aoir.org
Subject: [Air-l] list behavior

Another aspect of list behavior I find interesting is some folks' 
tendency to respond to a troll. Why do it? Despite Cornwell's truly
abysmal behavior on the list, some folks insist on looking for a silk
purse in his messages, and responding as if he were just another
internet scholar, and thereby legitimize his presence and previous
behavior. I've seen this before. I find it bizarre. Can anyone explain? 
Has anyone seen or done any research on this? (BTW, to the list member
who find's Cornwell's stuff on education and technology so
groundbreaking and insightful: Its not. It may be new to you, but that
ground has been broken for some time and is being tilled by lots of
other folks.)

_______________________________________________
The air-l at listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association
of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or
unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org

Join the Association of Internet Researchers: 
http://www.aoir.org/