Topics: Difference between revisions
m (Topics moved to Template:Topics: Same as Template:Tools this will let us embed the article on the main page without getting the main page out of sync) |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
=== Anonymity | This page is for topics that we have not yet scheduled (but potentially should). Please add suggestions to the bottom of this page. | ||
== Course intro == | |||
== Discourse theory == | |||
We should do a survey overview of the topic. | |||
== Discursive tools and practices == | |||
We should do a survey overview of the topic. | |||
== Overview of spring syllabus == | |||
== Anonymity == | |||
"on the internet, nobody knows that you're a dog." Or tall, or 12 years old, or a hairdresser by day, or a lesbian, or in India, or with a harelip, or... but also: now that we can't filter by that by default, what do we filter by? Do we now bias towards good writers - and what of people who communicate best non-verbally? | "on the internet, nobody knows that you're a dog." Or tall, or 12 years old, or a hairdresser by day, or a lesbian, or in India, or with a harelip, or... but also: now that we can't filter by that by default, what do we filter by? Do we now bias towards good writers - and what of people who communicate best non-verbally? | ||
== Sources == | |||
Where does the information for/during discussions come from? Interfaces/ease-of-access/digestibility of information affects how quickly it can get injected into conversations? (examples: hitting wikipedia in the middle of a dinner discussion, calling an expert friend or hitting another IRC channel to answer a quick question, etc). How does this affect how people prepare for conversations? (If you can easily look up notes during the meeting, why take them down beforehand?) Trying to apply some thoughts about [http://blog.melchua.com/2006/03/31/on-the-future-of-libraries-2/ info access in libraries] to this. | Where does the information for/during discussions come from? Interfaces/ease-of-access/digestibility of information affects how quickly it can get injected into conversations? (examples: hitting wikipedia in the middle of a dinner discussion, calling an expert friend or hitting another IRC channel to answer a quick question, etc). How does this affect how people prepare for conversations? (If you can easily look up notes during the meeting, why take them down beforehand?) Trying to apply some thoughts about [http://blog.melchua.com/2006/03/31/on-the-future-of-libraries-2/ info access in libraries] to this. | ||
== Identity and expertise == | |||
How are participants in an internet dialog identified and credentialed? What gives weight to a participants' arguments - or phrased another way, what type of participants and arguments have weight, and what determines this for each discussion, participant, and discussion point? | How are participants in an internet dialog identified and credentialed? What gives weight to a participants' arguments - or phrased another way, what type of participants and arguments have weight, and what determines this for each discussion, participant, and discussion point? | ||
== Socio-technical gap == | |||
Problems encountered in the act of discoursing itself are sometimes addressed via social means, technological means, or both. It has been suggested that technological tools should support social processes, but there is an adaptation of each realm to the other - how does this back-and-forth take place in the design of a successful technology-enabled discussion? | Problems encountered in the act of discoursing itself are sometimes addressed via social means, technological means, or both. It has been suggested that technological tools should support social processes, but there is an adaptation of each realm to the other - how does this back-and-forth take place in the design of a successful technology-enabled discussion? | ||
=== | == Other == | ||
== Deliberative polling literature == | |||
== Habermas == | |||
== Dryzek == | |||
== Jane Macoubrie == | |||
== Deliberation Day == | |||
The paper on the study, and where similar effects re: citizen participation may be seen. | |||
Revision as of 15:16, 20 November 2008
This page is for topics that we have not yet scheduled (but potentially should). Please add suggestions to the bottom of this page.
Course intro
Discourse theory
We should do a survey overview of the topic.
Discursive tools and practices
We should do a survey overview of the topic.
Overview of spring syllabus
Anonymity
"on the internet, nobody knows that you're a dog." Or tall, or 12 years old, or a hairdresser by day, or a lesbian, or in India, or with a harelip, or... but also: now that we can't filter by that by default, what do we filter by? Do we now bias towards good writers - and what of people who communicate best non-verbally?
Sources
Where does the information for/during discussions come from? Interfaces/ease-of-access/digestibility of information affects how quickly it can get injected into conversations? (examples: hitting wikipedia in the middle of a dinner discussion, calling an expert friend or hitting another IRC channel to answer a quick question, etc). How does this affect how people prepare for conversations? (If you can easily look up notes during the meeting, why take them down beforehand?) Trying to apply some thoughts about info access in libraries to this.
Identity and expertise
How are participants in an internet dialog identified and credentialed? What gives weight to a participants' arguments - or phrased another way, what type of participants and arguments have weight, and what determines this for each discussion, participant, and discussion point?
Socio-technical gap
Problems encountered in the act of discoursing itself are sometimes addressed via social means, technological means, or both. It has been suggested that technological tools should support social processes, but there is an adaptation of each realm to the other - how does this back-and-forth take place in the design of a successful technology-enabled discussion?
Other
Deliberative polling literature
Habermas
Dryzek
Jane Macoubrie
Deliberation Day
The paper on the study, and where similar effects re: citizen participation may be seen.