Subject:
|
Re: Pic: New Green Building
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.trains.org
|
Date:
|
Tue, 17 Apr 2001 00:41:10 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
604 times
|
| |
|
|
I agree, Larry, and I support your investigation of these dynamics.
Fascinating.
Ed
In lugnet.trains.org, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Two points...
>
> 1) a minor point of information:
>
> In lugnet.trains.org, John Kelly III writes:
> > In the same vein, we have decided to build to a
> > playtheme mentality instead of a mini-land mentality
>
> Can you elaborate on what playtheme vs. miniland is? Thanks.
>
> 2) a major point of philosophy
>
> It was not my intent in working this thread a bit to
>
> - stir up intra GMLTC disharmony. (what we see is mostly fun but there is a
> bit of not quite fun showing too. To the extent that I brought that out, I
> apologise)
> - say anything is "right" or "wrong". Stuff just is what it is.
>
> What WAS my intent (and this gets at the poster from GFLTC who said "this
> doesn't matter to us, it's just fun") was to explore some of the parameters
> and decisions and style points... WITHOUT casting aspersions on any
> decisions that anyone has taken or might take in the future.
>
> The whole idea is to have fun.
>
> So why DID I bring it up? Because this particular group is about .org...
> that is... it's about organizational dynamics, at least in part. I get to
> observe dynamics at various groups more than some other people do, for which
> I count myself lucky. I find organizational dynamics fascinating. LUGNET
> dynamics, club dynamics, etc. etc.
>
> Even in a club that tries very hard to be unstructured, structure creeps in.
> GMLTC has module standards that affect buildings. GFLTC has module standards
> that affect how different modules fit together. Both clubs had a decision
> process for how they arrived at that set of parameters. Formal or informal,
> structured or unstructured, that process arose and was there.
>
> My message to new clubs is just this. Draw from that, explore what other
> clubs did and why.
>
> Realise that even if you want to be informal, stuff happens and you may need
> to deal with it. Just saying that you want to have fun helps. Keep it in the
> back of your mind, but sometimes you will have to deal with organizational
> issues anyway. While you're dealing, keep repeating to yourself, we want to
> have fun, but don't refuse to deal.
>
> Realise that even if you want to be free of standards, standards arise and
> evolve. Just saying that you don't care about standards helps, but "if you
> choose not to decide you still have made a choice". If you don't care about
> standards, SAY IT and stick to it... if you can.
>
> Nobody likes to think about deeper meaning or group dynamics or structure or
> standards or any of that stuff to the exclusion of playing... But maybe
> thinking about it in advance may help. Or not. It's your choice as a group.
>
> If anyone thinks I am all wet they are free to say so at this point. I found
> this discussion constructive and useful.
>
> ++Lar
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Pic: New Green Building
|
| Two points... 1) a minor point of information: (...) Can you elaborate on what playtheme vs. miniland is? Thanks. 2) a major point of philosophy It was not my intent in working this thread a bit to - stir up intra GMLTC disharmony. (what we see is (...) (23 years ago, 16-Apr-01, to lugnet.trains.org)
|
45 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
