glevy@acnet.pratt.edu (glevy@acnet.pratt.edu)
Mon, 29 Jan 1996 14:53:41 -0800

[ show plain text ]

For most of this month, a large amount of list members have been
unavailable or on vacation. I believe that we are almost back up to "full
strength" now.

A number of members who have *not* been participating in the current
threads have told me that they view the thread on moral depreciation and
the valuation of inputs as very important. I suggest that we continue to
discuss that thread for the time being.

The question remains, however: what will we do next?

Alan's "cards on the table" suggestion [#779; 960111] seems to have met
with a fair degree of support. IMHO, the problem with the proposal,
though, is that like a real poker game, no one wants to be the first
(or even one of the first) to put their cards down on the table. It
seems that everyone is waiting to see what cards *others* have before
revealing their own.

I like Alan's "cards on the table" suggestion, but, we can not force
members to do what they are unready, at present, to do. If others like
his suggestion as well, then I would suggest that *you* put your cards on
the table now or soon.

Now, for my proposal:
I propose that in the month of February, we:

a) continue with the current threads so long as participants believe that
continued discussion is useful.

b) any list members who wish to put their "cards on the table" do so.

c) [Most importantly], that list members who want to discuss particular
topics in the month, *propose* a topic for discussion explaining briefly
why they view that topic as important and why they would like to see that
topic discussed soon.

d) We take the *two* topics from c) which receive the most support and
discuss them at length during *different* parts of the month. For this to
work best, I believe that the person making the suggestion should be
prepared to present a fairly long post on the topic to focus our
discussion and that those supporting that topic be prepared to comment on
that post.
The foregoing does not mean that we can not discuss other threads.
Instead, what it suggests is that we *concentrate* on two threads as if
we were having a seminar.

Note that this is *only* a proposal for February. If we decide to go
ahead with the proposal, then we can reevaluate what to do at the close
of the month in light of our new experiences.

We need input from more list members, IMO, in order to decide what to do
next. What do you think?

In OPE-L Solidarity,