Subject:
|
Re: [CW] Pawel and Craig - please clear up this confusion!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.castle
|
Date:
|
Sun, 13 Feb 2000 02:12:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1349 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.castle, Shiri Dori writes:
> After all, CW's point is to connect us all. To be in the same world, instead
> of seperate ones as we have been up until now.
This is my main focus. Having an organized method of scaling CW only makes
sense if this is your goal. But scale does not denote finitude. Within a
framework which exists largely as a common convention only, you can do
whatever you like. How can anyone object to the proposed idea of the map at
this point -- without even having seen what Pawel and Craig have actually
devised?
I'm sorry, but I just don't see why others cannot adopt a "wait and see"
attitude as a minimum standard of courtesy towards our CW founding member,
Pawel, and early CW balladeer, Craigo. I do not know Pawel personally, and I
do not speak for him -- nor for that matter do I speak for Craig. Both of them
are likely too polite to defend themselves in this matter. Speaking for
myself, I am frustrated that others feel that they must dictate to Pawel how
to organize CW. The whole thing was Pawel's idea to begin with and I trust him
100% to carry through with something that the rest of us will find
inspirational and enjoyable. And even if its not 100% what you might have done
in his place -- is it such a big deal to let it be established "as is"
nonetheless so that we may collectively and individually proceed to the next
steps in further developing CW?
Knowing that all of us will be able to develop our themes ABSOLUTELY as we see
fit, I see little point for complaint as of the moment. Infinite v finite but
infinitely expandable -- what's the difference unless you can turn the real
estate over for a profit? What are some of you thinking???!!!
Lastly, while the analogy is not perfect I think we should grant Pawel the
same sort of latitude in developing CW in its earliest stages as we do Todd
here on Lugnet. CW is intended as a place for free expression of your own
unique CW ideas -- but that does not mean it has to be 100% a democracy from
the outset. We can't be quarreling over the most minute foundational issues,
someone has to have the final say. I am personally willing to allow Pawel to
wield enough administrative authority to get the whole thing beyond its
infancy.
Would that be too big a sacrifice for some of you to commit to? Seems like a
trifle to me, especially in terms of what we are getting back again.
=)
- Richard (Now I have to go party, which is as it should be...)
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: [CW] Pawel and Craig - please clear up this confusion!
|
| (...) Who is trying to dictate anything? I've offered suggestions, that's all. (...) If I see something that I think could improve CW, why shouldn't I offer it up as a suggestion? Who is hurt by that? (...) Well, that's the big question, isn't it? I (...) (25 years ago, 13-Feb-00, to lugnet.castle)
|
Message is in Reply To:
39 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
