<font size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin:6pt 0cm 0pt 36pt;text-indent:0cm" class="MsoNormal"><i style><span style><font size="4"><font face="Garamond">Ginger
Paque : Personally, I <b style>disagree</b>,
because when an online communication gets 'too interactive', we have chaos, and
I think that short, pithy comments or questions are preferable in a webinar.
Bandwidth limitations must be taken into consideration as well. This is one
advantage to an email list like the IGC: it allows for full multi-party
discussion.</font></font></span></i></p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin:6pt 0cm 0pt 36pt;text-indent:0cm" class="MsoNormal"><i style><span style><font size="4"><font face="Garamond">Ricardo:
i do <b style>agree</b> that short communication
works better. Of course, it should be well sistematized (is this the right
word? Hehe) and everyone on the webinar should agree with a document on a wiki
or pad, </font></font></span></i></p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin:6pt 0cm 0pt;text-indent:0cm" class="MsoNormal"><i style><span style><font size="4" face="Garamond"> </font></span></i></p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin:6pt 0cm 0pt;text-indent:0cm" class="MsoNormal"><span style><font size="4"><font face="Garamond">Dear
Ginger and Ricardo:</font></font></span></p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin:6pt 0cm 0pt;text-indent:0cm" class="MsoNormal"><span style><font size="4"><font face="Garamond">I
have raised an issue in my blog (The twitter is the message), on which I invited you all to reflect. What I got back
was two votes (see above): yours, with a “vote explication” that was no more
than an assertion.</font></font></span></p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin:6pt 0cm 0pt 36pt;text-indent:0cm" class="MsoNormal"><span style><font size="4"><font face="Garamond">Of course short is better than long. My issue
was whether the twitter format was structurally so short as to stifle the very
essence of a dialogue – which is to deliberate.</font></font></span></p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin:6pt 0cm 0pt 36pt;text-indent:0cm" class="MsoNormal"><span style><font size="4"><font face="Garamond">Paul got the message, but then drifted into a
different – though very noteworthy issue – that of reception. In his framework
length of reply is irrelevant. Money determines who gets the message. And
indeed – in the future governments will no longer shut people up; they’ll just
render them ineffectual. When was it last time a soapbox man in Hyde Park
started a revolution?</font></font></span></p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin:6pt 0cm 0pt;text-indent:0cm" class="MsoNormal"><span style><font size="4"><font face="Garamond">Democracy
ought to be deliberative. By rushing to vote (agree/disagree) even before having
taken the time to reflect, you have terminated the discussion. The rest of the
group stood in silence – and I presume they agreed with you (qui tacet
consentire videtur). It was in ways a plebiscite.</font></font></span></p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin:6pt 0cm 0pt;text-indent:0cm" class="MsoNormal"><span style><font size="4"><font face="Garamond">Coming
back now to my point: take any of Plato’s great dialogues and replace all the entries
in it (but those of Socrates) by a twitter message. Then tell me whether you
think it has improved the symposion text.</font></font></span></p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin:6pt 0cm 0pt;text-indent:0cm" class="MsoNormal"><span style><font size="4"><font face="Garamond">My
blog very imperfectly pointed to the essence of being human (you know that
latest of the tailless apes) – their ability to have common goals, and to
create new ones by deliberation. The Western idea of the (intellectual) hero
who points to the way forward and is followed by group is historically inaccurate. Because
deliberation is oral and cannot be remembered, we ascribe the outcome to a
superior person.</font></font></span></p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin:6pt 0cm 0pt;text-indent:0cm" class="MsoNormal"><span style><font size="4"><font face="Garamond">Twitter-style
discourse tends to reduce the interaction to a vote – democratic for sure. Better than
a decision from on high by the elite. It comes at a price, however: it </font></font></span><span style><font size="4"><font face="Garamond">negates the very essence of a deliberation: the common reflection and input
from various points of view. The intellectual “trial and error” that allows the
best idea to survive.</font></font></span></p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin:6pt 0cm 0pt;text-indent:0cm" class="MsoNormal"><span style><font size="4"><font face="Garamond">James
SUROWIECKI in <i style>The Wisdom of crowds – Why the
many are smarter than the few</i> makes precisely this point: when people
deliberate (i.e. reflect for themselves), the outcome is – taking the long view
– better than that of any expert or elite. When people influence each other,
rather than reflect independently, one gets hysterias and manias.</font></font></span></p><font size="3" face="Times New Roman">
</font><div style="margin:6pt 0cm 0pt;text-indent:0cm" class="MsoNormal"><span style><font size="4"><font face="Garamond">In
the past elite did the thinking, and compliance by the majority was secured by (moral)
authority. I see no improvement in having the celebrity of the day do the same
as the elite, and her opinion being subject to plebiscite by twitter. Except
that there is a huge turnover in celebrities.</font></font></span></div><div style="margin:6pt 0cm 0pt;text-indent:0cm" class="MsoNormal"><span style><font size="4" face="Garamond">Aldo</font></span></div><div style="margin:6pt 0cm 0pt;text-indent:0cm" class="MsoNormal">
<span style><font size="4" face="Garamond"></font></span> </div><div class="gmail_quote">On 27 January 2012 14:30, Ginger Paque <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gpaque@gmail.com">gpaque@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote">Hi there,<br><br>Aldo, Diplo's resident contrarian, criticises Diplo's webinars and modern communication, asking 'Is the medium the twitter?' at <a href="http://deepdip.wordpress.com/2012/01/27/the-medium-is-the-twitter/" target="_blank">http://deepdip.wordpress.com/2012/01/27/the-medium-is-the-twitter/</a> He argues that
the way in which the Chinese 'Party universities', among others, discuss issues, is
conceptually and practically more effective (and congenial) than modern webinar/Twitter-technique communication. Personally, I disagree, because when an online communication gets 'too interactive', we have chaos, and I think that short, pithy comments or questions are preferable in a webinar. Bandwidth limitations must be taken into consideration as well. This is one advantage to an email list like the IGC: it allows for full multi-party discussion.<br>
<br> Please let us know your views about
this dilemma as we both try to improve our communication, and explore the topic as a concept for improved e-participation. You can also join us for the next webinar and see the
potentials and limitations of this medium, as we discuss SOPA, PIPA and the recent online blackout activities: <a href="http://www.diplomacy.edu/calendar/copyright-infringement-sopapipa-megaupload" target="_blank">http://www.diplomacy.edu/calendar/copyright-infringement-sopapipa-megaupload</a><br>
<br>Personally, I am wondering if the push to stop SOPA has strengthened ACTA.<br><br>Best, Ginger<br><br><br clear="all">Ginger (Virginia) Paque<br><div><span style="font-family:arial;font-size:small">Diplo Foundation<br>
<a href="http://www.diplomacy.edu/ig" target="_blank">www.diplomacy.edu/ig</a><span style="width:16px;padding-right:16px;min-height:16px"></span><span style="width:16px;padding-right:16px;min-height:16px"></span><span style="width:16px;padding-right:16px;min-height:16px"></span><div>
<a href="mailto:VirginiaP@diplomacy.edu" target="_blank">VirginiaP@diplomacy.edu</a><br><br><b><i><span style="font-size:10pt">Join the Diplo community IG discussions: <a href="http://www.diplointernetgovernance.org" target="_blank">www.diplointernetgovernance.org</a><span style="width:16px;padding-right:16px;min-height:16px"></span><span style="width:16px;padding-right:16px;min-height:16px"></span></span></i></b></div>
</span><br></div><br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Aldo Matteucci<br>65, Pourtalèsstr.<br>CH 3074 MURI b. Bern<br>Switzerland<br><a href="mailto:aldo.matteucci@gmail.com">aldo.matteucci@gmail.com</a><br><br>