Facebook

[deborah495 at AOL.COM]

I am with you! This non-discussion is filling my in box! Debbie Topol 
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

-----Original Message-----
From: "Erin Schneider" <erinlynnschneider at GMAIL.COM>
Sender: "linguists interested in signed languages" <SLLING-L at LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 11:46:23 
To: <SLLING-L at LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU>
Reply-To: "linguists interested in signed languages" <SLLING-L at LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU>
Subject: Re: Facebook

How do I get off of this list serve. I have yet to receive any emails about
Linguistics, only about how and where do have a discussion.

Erin L. Schneider, MA, NIC
240-688-9084 v/t
erinlynnschneider at gmail.com
On Sep 23, 2011 11:03 AM, "Trevor Jenkins" <trevor.jenkins at suneidesis.com>
wrote:
> Actually there is no difference at all between engaging in an academic
discussion via email and via a forum other than the transport mechanisms
involved. The mechanisms themselves have differences though: email is a push
and forum is a pull. That is email arrives on one's workstation without
additional actions on the part of the receipient once they have completed a
subscription process, such as we all did to join this list. Whereas for a
forum it requires one to go to the particular web site regularly ---- even
just to discover that there is nothing other discussants have posted. In
that latter case one wastes time. When there is no discussion contribution
via email no time is wasted at all. You might wish to look at the WikiPedia
entries for the two concepts Push technology and Pull technology and compare
the differences.
>
> As to feeling one mechanism is more "academic" than another that is
solipsism.
>
> My own solipsistic prejudice is for email but it is based on practical
issues. Firstly, because of the push-/pull- management of time mentioned
above. Secondly, With email I can take my time composing a reply, rewording
it several times, revising my thoughts, walking off to cool my ire, doing
some sign linguistics, coming back, changing my mind, revising again, having
my ire picqued again, cooling off, looking for references, reviewing
relevant sections. Try to be that academic on many forum systems and you'll
be timed-out and the draft text lost. Or try composing a reply to a forum
while one is off line, say in a railway tunnel or on a plane or somewhere
else out of reach of a network connection necessary for access to the
specific forum system.
>
> During one of those walk-off sessions in composing this very reply I
looked at the forums of your suggested LinkedIn. Examining random ones, on a
supposed professional media, all the discussions had devolved into the
stream of consciousness witterings of the twitterati.
>
> I will point out that before becoming professionally involved in sign
language linguistics I was an email and groupware consultant with a
prominent and large multi-national computer manufacturer and services
provider.
>
> Regards, Trevor.
>
> <>< Re: deemed!
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 23 Sep 2011, at 13:09, "Welsch, Brent" <bwelsch at IWCC.EDU> wrote:
>
>> Trevor,
>>
>>
>>
>> I understand what you’re thinking, but it’s not really an accurate
thinking. In the online academic world, there’s a big difference between
having a discussion through email and on a discussion forum. I don’t feel
like there’s a discussion when using an email listserv while I feel there is
one when I’m using a threaded discussion forum. Not to say that some folks
would start giving answers unrelated to the thread topic, the discussion
forum makes it a little tough for someone to just hit reply and make an off
the topic comment while that can happen more often on a listserv email.
>>
>>
>>
>> Brent
>>
>>
>>
>> From: linguists interested in signed languages [mailto:
SLLING-L at LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU] On Behalf Of Trevor Jenkins
>> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 5:16 PM
>> To: SLLING-L at LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU
>> Subject: Re: Facebook
>>
>>
>>
>> Funny I thought we had actual discussions here in an academic setting.
>>
>>
>> Regards, Trevor.
>>
>>
>>
>> <>< Re: deemed!
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>
>> On 19 Sep 2011, at 19:21, "Welsch, Brent" <bwelsch at IWCC.EDU> wrote:
>>
>> Not to brag, but LinkedIn doesn’t limit your discussions to 140
characters. They have actual discussion forums just like we would use on any
learning management system in the academic setting.
>>
>>
>>
>> From: linguists interested in signed languages [mailto:
SLLING-L at LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU] On Behalf Of Trevor Jenkins
>> Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 11:50 AM
>> To: SLLING-L at LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU
>> Subject: Re: Facebook
>>
>>
>>
>> On 19 Sep 2011, at 17:28, Welsch, Brent wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Rather than us each all proposing our favourite social networking site --
there are many that have not been mentioned yet --- have we asked and
answered the one important question "why?" and its subsidiary of "what for?"
>>
>>
>>
>> Is there a need for a Facebook/LinkedIn/Bebo/+1/Tumblr/MySpace/etcetcetc
group? What would it be used for? Will its existence bring anything to our
discussions as sign language linguists? Can one have a meaningful academic
discussions in 140 characters or less?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Has anyone considered doing a group on LinkedIn? It is more professional
than Facebook. I’m on LinkedIn and they set up groups like a discussion
forum, with rules of professionalism, etc.
>>
>>
>>
>> Brent Welsch
>>
>>
>>
>> From: linguists interested in signed languages [mailto:
SLLING-L at LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU] On Behalf Of Mark Mandel
>> Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 11:18 AM
>> To: SLLING-L at LISTSERV.VALENCIACOLLEGE.EDU
>> Subject: Re: Facebook
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree with Trevor. And in addition to the "push vs. pull" argument, I
find Facebook very distracting. It is hard to get out of once I get into it.
There are also many privacy concerns, which can be addressed by changing a
multitude of settings... and then paying attention to the warnings as new
holes are found and new settings added or changed to address them. Facebook
is fine for social networking for those who like it. Personally, I go to
parties and clubs to relax, not to do my work; and Facebook is like a party
in a loud club with flashing lights and dozens of conversations challenging
my focus.
>>
>>
>>
>> Mark Mandel
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11.09.16, at 5:16 AM, Trevor Jenkins wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Personally, I don't do Facebook (or any of the bandwagon social
networks). For me it isn't "easier", email is sent to me without me having
to do anything, Facebook (and the others) require me to actively go to their
website. It's push versus pull, in technical jargon. So it isn't easier
because these things demand that I make a conscious decision rather than
simply relying upon an automated system sending me messages.
>>
>> Regards, Trevor.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/slling-l/attachments/20110923/8030d005/attachment.htm>