[From Bill Powers (980818.0045 MDT)]
I wondered whether something like this might happen: most of the comments
about the "new net" idea were from people who have sat out the
"discussions" that have been going on recently. I have received valuable
comments both on the net and privately. One of the best ideas is,
unfortunately, not practicable for me: to have private one-on-one
conversations with everybody. I already spend six or more hours per day,
seven days per week, writing on CSGnet (or did before I withdrew); I'm
afraid that going to private conversations would raise that to 60 hours per
day or so. Even if it doesn't show, I spend a lot of time working out those
answers and editing them for content, spelling, and English. Sometimes I
should have spent even more time and ended up deleting the whole thing, as
I do often but sometimes not often enough.
I think the good advice boils down to two conclusions, for me.
First, don't get drawn into subjects that don't promise to help teach PCT
or improve PCT, especially subjects about which I know very little. If this
ends up leaving some people, sometimes, feeling ignored, at least it won't
leave them actively hating me.
And second, don't split up CSGnet into special interest groups. One of the
best aspects of our annual meetings is that all sessions are plenary:
everybody hears what everybody else has to say. The clinicians learn to
talk to the technicians and vice versa, even if mutual understanding isn't
100% complete. CSGers need to be aware of all that's going on, even if it's
not all central to their interests. I have been reminded a number of times
of the presence of the delete key.
Right now there are two off-net threads going (that I know of), one on the
method of levels and the other on mathematical modeling (barely started). I
recommend to those on these threads that we just label them MOL or MODELING
and put them on csgnet. There's always that delete key. The only exception
would be discussions of specific transcripts of MOL sessions, which ought
to remain private even though personal identities are concealed. Summaries
and excerpts can go on CSGnet.
I am going to focus on modeling. Marc Abrams has called "Vensim PLE" to my
attention, and I'm going to see about using it. Marc has offered to help
with tutorials. So far it looks very good: a graphics-based modeling system
that allows non-programmers to build and test dynamic models. The Personal
Learning Edition (PLE) is distributed FREE to individuals and educators,
and there are versions for both the PC and the MAC. Furthermore, model
setups can be transmitted over the internet, so everyone can import and run
them. Look up "vensim PLE" on Yahoo and go to the download page you will
find. Download the program and the .pdf documentation.
I hope everyone with a computer will do this, because learning to model is
really very important. It's important not just for form's sake, but because
the very process of modeling teaches us how human control systems work. And
it teaches us how to tell when we have a half-baked idea as opposed to one
that has at least a chance of working.
I'm going to focus on learning Vensim for a while, and will pass on what I
learn to them who are interested. If we spend some time getting familiar
with this program, I think communication on this net will greatly improve.
I do NOT plan to discuss coercion any more.
Best,
Bill P.