> From: email@example.com (jack hirschfeld)
> Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 20:52:01 -0400
> Subject: Dialogue Expt Here LO10206
> But in a
> conscious dialogue - in my opinion - it matters a great deal if people are
> present and if they are attentive. But they may be silent. If I can't
> see them, how can I know whether silence is rumination or absence?
> Interruption is not the issue; active silence is. There may be no way to
> overcome this, but I needed to put the issue on the table.
I want to "second" your point, and to expand on it slightly. I've found
I've wanted to "nod agreement" many times in response to different posts,
but there isn't a convenient way to do that. I've taken to posting
privately to the individual who did the posting, but this isn't the same
as nodding agreement or showing active listening in the context of a
group. I'm not sure that there's any easy way around the constraints of
the medium of our current dialogue. Being aware of the constraints so we
can question our own interpretation of "silence" seems important, though.
Jeff Brooks <BrooksJeff@AOL.com>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <firstname.lastname@example.org> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>