I am a list owner myself of a successful Webheads list, successful in that
the list I started has taken on a life of its own as this one has.

As owner of this list it would be in my power to shut it down but I have to
ask myself why?  Why would I do that?  If I tired of it I would simply walk
away.  There are hundreds of people interacting, and why stop them?  They've
found a space, why not let them carry on?

So I don't understand Scott's reasoning exactly.  Why not just leave the
list in place?  Why force a move?

Vance


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Bragg" <chalkfacehero@...>
To: <dogme@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 10:42 AM
Subject: Re: [dogme] Re: 10th anniversary - and close down!


I say go for it, Fiona. You don't have to ask for Scott's approval, or
anybody else's, as ideas belong to us all.

As long as there's some sort of 'critical mass' willing to push the stone up
the hill again, we can keep Sisyphus occupied for another ten years or so!

Jeff

--- On Sun, 28/2/10, fiotf <fiolima@...> wrote:

From: fiotf <fiolima@...>
Subject: [dogme] Re: 10th anniversary - and close down!
To: dogme@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, 28 February, 2010, 22:05

















       Cheesecake apart, I'm having an idea. You can probably hear the cogs
from wherever you are.



I can understand Scott's decision/wish perfectly. Like it or not, the dogme
group is as closely associated with his name, as is the whole approach. For
better and for worse. If he feels it is time to move on, I, for one, second
that.



However, reading Sara, Karenne and others, I'm wondering if this is also the
time to bring dogme 2.0 into official being? I'm willing to set up a
separate group and moderate it ie kill spam, post interesting (?) links etc.
and slightly off-the-wall comments, and call it the dogme 2.0 group (or
similar) - maybe Dennis could co-moderate from his lodge or villa in Second
Life ;-) and perhaps it could be the place to migrate to, if you wish. And
keep the original dogme group as an archive, in line with Scott's wishes.

So... well, if you think it's worth it, let me know off-list, please. If I
get around 25 messages (or more, obviously), I'll do it. If Scott agrees.
You have until next Friday 5th March 9pm GMT to let me know (email with
dogme 2.0 on the subject line, please). Ready, get set..... GO!



Cheesecake for the first twenty-five email senders....

;-)



Fiona



--- In dogme@yahoogroups. com, pannazosia@. .. wrote:

>

> mixed feelings- or, perhaps, no feelings as yet, but shock - definitely.

> amazing, that - for quite a few years I didn't really contributeall that

> much, but now with Scott;s announcement came the sense of loss. so perhaps

> what I feel is not  different from grief when someone well known has
> passed

> away. bizarre? I don't know... dogme has become part of my life, even when

> some threads infuriated me or left me cold - others profited and it was
> like

> a real community .

>

> Scott, I guess you are the owner of the list so you can euthanize it, but

> are you sure that killing a community that's alive and kicking is humane?

>

> whattever happens... oh, one more thing: Karenne speculated (or have you

> some ironclad facts?) that some older members could have left as their
> needs

> were unmet - sounds rather unlikely - I remember several postings when

> people felt that the list strayed off-track . Guess that perhaps sometimes

> there is less need to be active on the list, that's all.

>

>

> Jane, I do hope that your words come true  and I fear a little losing
> touch

> with you guys. I have become so attached to the mere fact of dogme list

> "being there" - even if the threads were un-dogme!

>

> BTW I love lemon cheesecake,Fiona. must visit  Spain...

>

> Bye all

>

> Zosia

>

>

> dogme@yahoogroups. com napisa³(a):

>

>   Sob. Hope the cyber "ink" doesn't run with my tears. Just found out

>   about the close down, appropriately from one of the dogme old-timers

>   having lunch at my place (even though the news was bad, your lemon

>   cheesecake was great, Fiona). Have now reading Scott's message. I'm

>   sure he knows what is best and this may even push dogme into new areas.

>   Our dogme writing and lurking urges now need to find new outlets.

>   But it has been good and will certainly be something we can fondly look

>   back on.

>   Thanks to Scott and to everyone who has made the site so interesting.

>   Jane Arnold

>   Seville, Spain

>   >

>   >

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>

























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

To Post a message, send it to:   dogme@eGroups.com
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: dogme-unsubscribe@...!
Groups Links

I agree with Vance. If you don't want to deal with the Group, just walk away,
don't look back and let it continue.

Gary L. Harwell
www.teachergary.com


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, Vance Stevens <vstevens@...> wrote:

> So I don't understand Scott's reasoning exactly.  Why not just leave the
> list in place?  Why force a move?
>

Good question,Vance.  One that gave me pause. Why DOESN'T dogme seem quite the
same as, say, Webheads, and harder, therefore, to walk away from?  I think one
reason is that, for better or worse, dogme is fairly strongly identified with
me, and me with it.  In the last 10 years, I've given a lot of workshops and
written a lot of articles on the subject of dogme, culminating in the book,
Teaching Unplugged, that Luke and I wrote last year. Even though I have probably
contributed fewer postings, over the years, than say Rob, or Diarmuid, or Fiona
- I am, for many people, the public face of dogme, Mr Dogme, even. Because of
these indelible associations, I feel a certain responsibility to invigilate the
site, to keep an eye on it, and to keep it on track, as it were. At the same
time, this proprietorial tendency sits uncomfortably with my conviction that
dogme DOESN'T belong to me - that it has long since flown the nest, so to speak,
and is being reinvented in a variety of exciting ways (e.g. by Howard Vickers in
his Avatar Languages, by Anthony Gaughan and his Teacher Training Unplugged, by
James Knott and his school in Ekatarinaburg, and in many other dogme-influenced
innovative projects). Closing the Dogme list acknowledges, symbolically, the
self-propagating and diversifying nature of dogme, while at the same time it
releases me from the (sometimes stifling) sense of this close identification
with dogme.

I guess I feel that if I tried to walk away, the dogme site would follow me,
heaving itself across the sand like a wounded sea-cow, barking plaintively...

(Or is it me who is barking?)

It's you, actually Scott, howling at moons, to be frank.

Dogme won't go away: whether or not the list goes away.

You put a name to something that existed.

Sort of like "Columbus discovered the Caribbean."

Did Columbus invent the Caribbean?

Did people live in the Caribbean before Columbus?

Is Columbus' name indelibly associated with the Caribbean?

Did you "invent" teaching without coursebooks?

No you did not.

Not anyone on this list did that and it's an unsurmountable arrogance to even
flickr a whimper in the direction that you did.

What all of you did was put it on the map.

You, in particular, took your name and marked the territory so it's rather
churlish of you to "walk away" simply because it barks and bites back.

Are you, Scott or Luke, the owners of dogme?

No.

The name itself was not even a creation of your own minds' imagination but a
term borrowed from a movement in film.

Can you decide and dictate where dogme goes next?

No.

Because like the Caribbean it will be taken over by those who wish to raid it
for its riches, gold and lush soils.  History has someone to point a finger at,
whether you skulk with tail between legs, whether you yap or whine or whether
you choose instead to stand guard, proudly and loyally.

Well, blah blah... I'm done playing out this particular word play. You get the
point. I basically think like a lot of others have said already and Simon
Greenall noted: rather a top-down decision for a "dogmeist."

So this is it: as honest as it gets.

And as this is my last post to the dogme group:
- - -

Good bye to all of the rest of you on this list, thank you for so many of your
entertaining and interesting ideas, lesson plans, contributions, philosophies
and arguments.

I wish you all much luck and happiness and always in class: fruitful, engaging
and dynamic conversations.

Until our e-paths cross again, be most well.

Karenne
twitter: @kalinagoenglish
blog: http://kalinago.blogspot.com

--- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" <scott.thornbury@...> wrote:
>
>
> --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, Vance Stevens <vstevens@> wrote:
>
> > So I don't understand Scott's reasoning exactly.  Why not just leave the
> > list in place?  Why force a move?
> >
>
> Good question,Vance.  One that gave me pause. Why DOESN'T dogme seem quite the
same as, say, Webheads, and harder, therefore, to walk away from?  I think one
reason is that, for better or worse, dogme is fairly strongly identified with
me, and me with it.  In the last 10 years, I've given a lot of workshops and
written a lot of articles on the subject of dogme, culminating in the book,
Teaching Unplugged, that Luke and I wrote last year. Even though I have probably
contributed fewer postings, over the years, than say Rob, or Diarmuid, or Fiona
- I am, for many people, the public face of dogme, Mr Dogme, even. Because of
these indelible associations, I feel a certain responsibility to invigilate the
site, to keep an eye on it, and to keep it on track, as it were. At the same
time, this proprietorial tendency sits uncomfortably with my conviction that
dogme DOESN'T belong to me - that it has long since flown the nest, so to speak,
and is being reinvented in a variety of exciting ways (e.g. by Howard Vickers in
his Avatar Languages, by Anthony Gaughan and his Teacher Training Unplugged, by
James Knott and his school in Ekatarinaburg, and in many other dogme-influenced
innovative projects). Closing the Dogme list acknowledges, symbolically, the
self-propagating and diversifying nature of dogme, while at the same time it
releases me from the (sometimes stifling) sense of this close identification
with dogme.
>
> I guess I feel that if I tried to walk away, the dogme site would follow me,
heaving itself across the sand like a wounded sea-cow, barking plaintively...
>
> (Or is it me who is barking?)
>

Thanks Scott, for pausing and reflecting and taking time to reply to my
message.

I think I understand your feelings of attachment and responsibility for the
Dogme list. You are a recognized leader and guiding light of the list, as I
am, for that matter, with respect to Webheads.  I like to feel that if I
were to disappear (walk away, whatever) that Webheads would continue.  I
think it's the same with Dogme.  Our contributions to the two concepts would
always be recognized, but both concepts have gained traction to the point
where there is enough of a critical mass that the interactions and
explorations of the concepts will continue in our absence.  I've often
mentioned this as a kind of a litmus test.  If something is truly worth
doing, it will continue apart from any individual who might have driven it
in the first place. There are many ideas driven by a single individual, I'm
sure you can think of a few, that if that individual stops pushing them,
they will quickly become forgotten apart from footnotes. Individuals
wondering if they should keep promoting those ideas might put themselves to
that test.  If they walk away and the idea is dropped, then the decision to
move on, for that individual, was probably the right one.

So a measure of your success is the fact when you announce that after ten
years, you are hoping to put a nice wrapping on the package and send it off
into the time capsule, people actually care!

So the question is not, what will happen to Dogme, but what will happen to
this list.  I would argue, and respect your counterarguments, that the list
is 'owned' by its participants.  Considering what I know of social dynamics
of such movements and what happens to communities when their spaces are
threatened (look at real communities, like in New Orleans for example) the
people still exist but with the disappearance of their space, something
happens to the fabric of their cohesion with one another.

So, I would counsel, from that perspective, to consider what happens to a
community when their homes are bulldozed.  They will continue to exist and
many might regroup in another place, but they will have lost that strong
connection with a comfortable and vibrant space which they clearly
appreciate having.  So I would like to (virtually only) symbolically and
respectfully position myself in the way of the bulldozers and request that
the courts revisit the demolition order, and perhaps these homes can remain
standing and the residents continue with the happy interchanges they have
had for the past ten years in this highly regarded space.

Even the sound of barking in such a neighborhood is a welcome backdrop to
the zeitgeist enjoyed there.

Thanks very much for carefully weighing the pros and cons.

Vance


----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott" <scott.thornbury@...>
To: <dogme@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 2:17 AM
Subject: [dogme] Just walk away!


>
> --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, Vance Stevens <vstevens@...> wrote:
>
>> So I don't understand Scott's reasoning exactly.  Why not just leave the
>> list in place?  Why force a move?
>>
>
> Good question,Vance.  One that gave me pause. Why DOESN'T dogme seem quite
> the same as, say, Webheads, and harder, therefore, to walk away from?  I
> think one reason is that, for better or worse, dogme is fairly strongly
> identified with me, and me with it.  In the last 10 years, I've given a
> lot of workshops and written a lot of articles on the subject of dogme,
> culminating in the book, Teaching Unplugged, that Luke and I wrote last
> year. Even though I have probably contributed fewer postings, over the
> years, than say Rob, or Diarmuid, or Fiona - I am, for many people, the
> public face of dogme, Mr Dogme, even. Because of these indelible
> associations, I feel a certain responsibility to invigilate the site, to
> keep an eye on it, and to keep it on track, as it were. At the same time,
> this proprietorial tendency sits uncomfortably with my conviction that
> dogme DOESN'T belong to me - that it has long since flown the nest, so to
> speak, and is being reinvented in a variety of exciting ways
> (eg. by Howard Vickers in his Avatar Languages, by Anthony Gaughan and his
> Teacher Training Unplugged, by James Knott and his school in
> Ekatarinaburg, and in many other dogme-influenced innovative projects).
> Closing the Dogme list acknowledges, symbolically, the self-propagating
> and diversifying nature of dogme, while at the same time it releases me
> from the (sometimes stifling) sense of this close identification with
> dogme.
>
> I guess I feel that if I tried to walk away, the dogme site would follow
> me, heaving itself across the sand like a wounded sea-cow, barking
> plaintively...
>
> (Or is it me who is barking?)
>

I have been teaching without textbooks for 20 years (not all courses though).
Two of the articles below are just about that--running whole-class activities
without a textbook.

Charles Jannuzi
University of Fukui, Japan
http://eltinjapan.blogspot.com/

01 March 2010
ELT-J Issue #2 (March 2010)

http://eltinjapan.blogspot.com/2010/03/elt-j-issue-2-march-2010.html

ELT in Japan Issue 2 (March 2010)


Contents
(1)  Devising multiple-choice questions, quizzes and tests
(2)  Semantic mapping activities for the speaking class
(3)  Semantic mapping activities for the writing class

Let's vote on it! You have until March 8th.
(See Polls)

I think Vance has just summed it up very well for me. I'm relatively new to this
list, but if the list does disappear, then a part of me will feel homeless.

Closing down the list does kind of feel like a decision that a very autocratic
city mayor would make. But then again, maybe the city mayor underestimated the
strength of feeling from one particular group of people. Good that you've put a
poll up to give everyone a voice on the matter.

Dogme will definitely still survive without the list, but I think it would be
weaker without of it. Without the list, I definitely wouldn't have shared my
experiences of Dogme a couple of months ago and wouldn't have had lots of useful
suggestions and feedback in return. I also wouldn't have had the pleasure of
reading about how dogme has made an impact on other people's teaching.

Sure, there's a lot to be found on other mediums such as blogs and on Twitter
but I also think that a lot of people will be missing out on a lot of sharing of
thoughts and ideas if the list were to be closed down.

Will be very sorry to see it go (if it does).

Peter

--- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, Vance Stevens <vstevens@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks Scott, for pausing and reflecting and taking time to reply to my
> message.
>
> I think I understand your feelings of attachment and responsibility for the
> Dogme list. You are a recognized leader and guiding light of the list, as I
> am, for that matter, with respect to Webheads.  I like to feel that if I
> were to disappear (walk away, whatever) that Webheads would continue.  I
> think it's the same with Dogme.  Our contributions to the two concepts would
> always be recognized, but both concepts have gained traction to the point
> where there is enough of a critical mass that the interactions and
> explorations of the concepts will continue in our absence.  I've often
> mentioned this as a kind of a litmus test.  If something is truly worth
> doing, it will continue apart from any individual who might have driven it
> in the first place. There are many ideas driven by a single individual, I'm
> sure you can think of a few, that if that individual stops pushing them,
> they will quickly become forgotten apart from footnotes. Individuals
> wondering if they should keep promoting those ideas might put themselves to
> that test.  If they walk away and the idea is dropped, then the decision to
> move on, for that individual, was probably the right one.
>
> So a measure of your success is the fact when you announce that after ten
> years, you are hoping to put a nice wrapping on the package and send it off
> into the time capsule, people actually care!
>
> So the question is not, what will happen to Dogme, but what will happen to
> this list.  I would argue, and respect your counterarguments, that the list
> is 'owned' by its participants.  Considering what I know of social dynamics
> of such movements and what happens to communities when their spaces are
> threatened (look at real communities, like in New Orleans for example) the
> people still exist but with the disappearance of their space, something
> happens to the fabric of their cohesion with one another.
>
> So, I would counsel, from that perspective, to consider what happens to a
> community when their homes are bulldozed.  They will continue to exist and
> many might regroup in another place, but they will have lost that strong
> connection with a comfortable and vibrant space which they clearly
> appreciate having.  So I would like to (virtually only) symbolically and
> respectfully position myself in the way of the bulldozers and request that
> the courts revisit the demolition order, and perhaps these homes can remain
> standing and the residents continue with the happy interchanges they have
> had for the past ten years in this highly regarded space.
>
> Even the sound of barking in such a neighborhood is a welcome backdrop to
> the zeitgeist enjoyed there.
>
> Thanks very much for carefully weighing the pros and cons.
>
> Vance
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Scott" <scott.thornbury@...>
> To: <dogme@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 2:17 AM
> Subject: [dogme] Just walk away!
>
>
> >
> > --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, Vance Stevens <vstevens@> wrote:
> >
> >> So I don't understand Scott's reasoning exactly.  Why not just leave the
> >> list in place?  Why force a move?
> >>
> >
> > Good question,Vance.  One that gave me pause. Why DOESN'T dogme seem quite
> > the same as, say, Webheads, and harder, therefore, to walk away from?  I
> > think one reason is that, for better or worse, dogme is fairly strongly
> > identified with me, and me with it.  In the last 10 years, I've given a
> > lot of workshops and written a lot of articles on the subject of dogme,
> > culminating in the book, Teaching Unplugged, that Luke and I wrote last
> > year. Even though I have probably contributed fewer postings, over the
> > years, than say Rob, or Diarmuid, or Fiona - I am, for many people, the
> > public face of dogme, Mr Dogme, even. Because of these indelible
> > associations, I feel a certain responsibility to invigilate the site, to
> > keep an eye on it, and to keep it on track, as it were. At the same time,
> > this proprietorial tendency sits uncomfortably with my conviction that
> > dogme DOESN'T belong to me - that it has long since flown the nest, so to
> > speak, and is being reinvented in a variety of exciting ways
> > (eg. by Howard Vickers in his Avatar Languages, by Anthony Gaughan and his
> > Teacher Training Unplugged, by James Knott and his school in
> > Ekatarinaburg, and in many other dogme-influenced innovative projects).
> > Closing the Dogme list acknowledges, symbolically, the self-propagating
> > and diversifying nature of dogme, while at the same time it releases me
> > from the (sometimes stifling) sense of this close identification with
> > dogme.
> >
> > I guess I feel that if I tried to walk away, the dogme site would follow
> > me, heaving itself across the sand like a wounded sea-cow, barking
> > plaintively...
> >
> > (Or is it me who is barking?)
> >
>

Thanks, Vance. I felt uneasy reading Karenne's posting (sapientis verbum as
to why) but what a relief to open your letter and see that it expresses my
thoughts and feelings.

whatever happens - thanks, Scott. Yours is not the idea nor the name, but
you were (are?) the "guardian of the ring"

Zosia
dogme@yahoogroups.com napisa³(a):

   Thanks Scott, for pausing and reflecting and taking time to reply to my
   message.

   I think I understand your feelings of attachment and responsibility for
   the
   Dogme list. You are a recognized leader and guiding light of the list,
   as I
   am, for that matter, with respect to Webheads. I like to feel that if I
   were to disappear (walk away, whatever) that Webheads would continue. I
   think it's the same with Dogme. Our contributions to the two concepts
   would
   always be recognized, but both concepts have gained traction to the
   point
   where there is enough of a critical mass that the interactions and
   explorations of the concepts will continue in our absence. I've often
   mentioned this as a kind of a litmus test. If something is truly worth
   doing, it will continue apart from any individual who might have driven
   it
   in the first place. There are many ideas driven by a single individual,
   I'm
   sure you can think of a few, that if that individual stops pushing them,
   they will quickly become forgotten apart from footnotes. Individuals
   wondering if they should keep promoting those ideas might put themselves
   to
   that test. If they walk away and the idea is dropped, then the decision
   to
   move on, for that individual, was probably the right one.

   So a measure of your success is the fact when you announce that after
   ten
   years, you are hoping to put a nice wrapping on the package and send it
   off
   into the time capsule, people actually care!

   So the question is not, what will happen to Dogme, but what will happen
   to
   this list. I would argue, and respect your counterarguments, that the
   list
   is 'owned' by its participants. Considering what I know of social
   dynamics
   of such movements and what happens to communities when their spaces are
   threatened (look at real communities, like in New Orleans for example)
   the
   people still exist but with the disappearance of their space, something
   happens to the fabric of their cohesion with one another.

   So, I would counsel, from that perspective, to consider what happens to
   a
   community when their homes are bulldozed. They will continue to exist
   and
   many might regroup in another place, but they will have lost that strong
   connection with a comfortable and vibrant space which they clearly
   appreciate having. So I would like to (virtually only) symbolically and
   respectfully position myself in the way of the bulldozers and request
   that
   the courts revisit the demolition order, and perhaps these homes can
   remain
   standing and the residents continue with the happy interchanges they
   have
   had for the past ten years in this highly regarded space.

   Even the sound of barking in such a neighborhood is a welcome backdrop
   to
   the zeitgeist enjoyed there.

   Thanks very much for carefully weighing the pros and cons.

   Vance

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: "Scott" <scott.thornbury@...>
   To: <dogme@yahoogroups.com>
   Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 2:17 AM
   Subject: [dogme] Just walk away!

   >
   > --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, Vance Stevens <vstevens@...> wrote:
   >
   >> So I don't understand Scott's reasoning exactly. Why not just leave
   the
   >> list in place? Why force a move?
   >>
   >
   > Good question,Vance. One that gave me pause. Why DOESN'T dogme seem
   quite
   > the same as, say, Webheads, and harder, therefore, to walk away from?
   I
   > think one reason is that, for better or worse, dogme is fairly
   strongly
   > identified with me, and me with it. In the last 10 years, I've given a
   > lot of workshops and written a lot of articles on the subject of
   dogme,
   > culminating in the book, Teaching Unplugged, that Luke and I wrote
   last
   > year. Even though I have probably contributed fewer postings, over the
   > years, than say Rob, or Diarmuid, or Fiona - I am, for many people,
   the
   > public face of dogme, Mr Dogme, even. Because of these indelible
   > associations, I feel a certain responsibility to invigilate the site,
   to
   > keep an eye on it, and to keep it on track, as it were. At the same
   time,
   > this proprietorial tendency sits uncomfortably with my conviction that
   > dogme DOESN'T belong to me - that it has long since flown the nest, so
   to
   > speak, and is being reinvented in a variety of exciting ways
   > (eg. by Howard Vickers in his Avatar Languages, by Anthony Gaughan and
   his
   > Teacher Training Unplugged, by James Knott and his school in
   > Ekatarinaburg, and in many other dogme-influenced innovative
   projects).
   > Closing the Dogme list acknowledges, symbolically, the
   self-propagating
   > and diversifying nature of dogme, while at the same time it releases
   me
   > from the (sometimes stifling) sense of this close identification with
   > dogme.
   >
   > I guess I feel that if I tried to walk away, the dogme site would
   follow
   > me, heaving itself across the sand like a wounded sea-cow, barking
   > plaintively...
   >
   > (Or is it me who is barking?)
   >




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I'm with Vance here. Maybe my vote counts little, since I've contributed very
little to the group. But I'm a dedicated lurker: I get the new posts every day,
and I do follow threads that interest me.

Scott said that dogme teaching has flown the nest for him: it's 'out there' now,
in many different forms. But is there really a list like this, with a dedicated
focus and a large number of dogme veterans? (If so, please let me know and I'll
just move.)

I think it's easy for some people to embrace the closing of the group because
they're now more at home with this type of teaching approach. They've been
through all the growing pains, and have worked out their own relationship with
dogme. But I teach little, so my development as a teacher is slower, and I
certainly get a lot of support and especially reassurance from this group. We're
not all dogme veterans: there are still newcomers to dogme--every day, dare I
surmise--and people who are still testing their dogme wings. What can we do if
this list closes?

Please keep it open!

Jan

--- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, Vance Stevens <vstevens@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks Scott, for pausing and reflecting and taking time to reply to my
> message.
>
> I think I understand your feelings of attachment and responsibility for the
> Dogme list. You are a recognized leader and guiding light of the list, as I
> am, for that matter, with respect to Webheads.  I like to feel that if I
> were to disappear (walk away, whatever) that Webheads would continue.  I
> think it's the same with Dogme.  Our contributions to the two concepts would
> always be recognized, but both concepts have gained traction to the point
> where there is enough of a critical mass that the interactions and
> explorations of the concepts will continue in our absence.  I've often
> mentioned this as a kind of a litmus test.  If something is truly worth
> doing, it will continue apart from any individual who might have driven it
> in the first place. There are many ideas driven by a single individual, I'm
> sure you can think of a few, that if that individual stops pushing them,
> they will quickly become forgotten apart from footnotes. Individuals
> wondering if they should keep promoting those ideas might put themselves to
> that test.  If they walk away and the idea is dropped, then the decision to
> move on, for that individual, was probably the right one.
>
> So a measure of your success is the fact when you announce that after ten
> years, you are hoping to put a nice wrapping on the package and send it off
> into the time capsule, people actually care!
>
> So the question is not, what will happen to Dogme, but what will happen to
> this list.  I would argue, and respect your counterarguments, that the list
> is 'owned' by its participants.  Considering what I know of social dynamics
> of such movements and what happens to communities when their spaces are
> threatened (look at real communities, like in New Orleans for example) the
> people still exist but with the disappearance of their space, something
> happens to the fabric of their cohesion with one another.
>
> So, I would counsel, from that perspective, to consider what happens to a
> community when their homes are bulldozed.  They will continue to exist and
> many might regroup in another place, but they will have lost that strong
> connection with a comfortable and vibrant space which they clearly
> appreciate having.  So I would like to (virtually only) symbolically and
> respectfully position myself in the way of the bulldozers and request that
> the courts revisit the demolition order, and perhaps these homes can remain
> standing and the residents continue with the happy interchanges they have
> had for the past ten years in this highly regarded space.
>
> Even the sound of barking in such a neighborhood is a welcome backdrop to
> the zeitgeist enjoyed there.
>
> Thanks very much for carefully weighing the pros and cons.
>
> Vance
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Scott" <scott.thornbury@...>
> To: <dogme@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 2:17 AM
> Subject: [dogme] Just walk away!
>
>
> >
> > --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, Vance Stevens <vstevens@> wrote:
> >
> >> So I don't understand Scott's reasoning exactly.  Why not just leave the
> >> list in place?  Why force a move?
> >>
> >
> > Good question,Vance.  One that gave me pause. Why DOESN'T dogme seem quite
> > the same as, say, Webheads, and harder, therefore, to walk away from?  I
> > think one reason is that, for better or worse, dogme is fairly strongly
> > identified with me, and me with it.  In the last 10 years, I've given a
> > lot of workshops and written a lot of articles on the subject of dogme,
> > culminating in the book, Teaching Unplugged, that Luke and I wrote last
> > year. Even though I have probably contributed fewer postings, over the
> > years, than say Rob, or Diarmuid, or Fiona - I am, for many people, the
> > public face of dogme, Mr Dogme, even. Because of these indelible
> > associations, I feel a certain responsibility to invigilate the site, to
> > keep an eye on it, and to keep it on track, as it were. At the same time,
> > this proprietorial tendency sits uncomfortably with my conviction that
> > dogme DOESN'T belong to me - that it has long since flown the nest, so to
> > speak, and is being reinvented in a variety of exciting ways
> > (eg. by Howard Vickers in his Avatar Languages, by Anthony Gaughan and his
> > Teacher Training Unplugged, by James Knott and his school in
> > Ekatarinaburg, and in many other dogme-influenced innovative projects).
> > Closing the Dogme list acknowledges, symbolically, the self-propagating
> > and diversifying nature of dogme, while at the same time it releases me
> > from the (sometimes stifling) sense of this close identification with
> > dogme.
> >
> > I guess I feel that if I tried to walk away, the dogme site would follow
> > me, heaving itself across the sand like a wounded sea-cow, barking
> > plaintively...
> >
> > (Or is it me who is barking?)
> >
>

Dear Scott, dear all

I can't believe this list is 10 years old - it's been a pleasure to lurk! Thanks
to all who had the energy and generosity to share their thoughts and ideas.

I found this the other day in the recent  Allwright/Hanks book, `The developing
learner' (which also references dogme, BTW) -  `Teachers should think for
themselves and never accept any idea on trust'. Sums up this list and dogme
generally for me...

All the best

graham

a very dogmetic point here: do we weigh votes according to the number of
posts? what is the input of a silent student? any comments? I had a few of
those silent types who nonetheless somehow got the spirit of the group
flowing. how it happens, I dunno - was too busy interacting with the voluble
ones...

Zosia


dogme@yahoogroups.com napisa³(a):

   I'm with Vance here. Maybe my vote counts little, since I've contributed
   very little to the group. But I'm a dedicated lurker: I get the new
   posts every day, and I do follow threads that interest me.

   Scott said that dogme teaching has flown the nest for him: it's 'out
   there' now, in many different forms. But is there really a list like
   this, with a dedicated focus and a large number of dogme veterans? (If
   so, please let me know and I'll just move.)

   I think it's easy for some people to embrace the closing of the group
   because they're now more at home with this type of teaching approach.
   They've been through all the growing pains, and have worked out their
   own relationship with dogme. But I teach little, so my development as a
   teacher is slower, and I certainly get a lot of support and especially
   reassurance from this group. We're not all dogme veterans: there are
   still newcomers to dogme--every day, dare I surmise--and people who are
   still testing their dogme wings. What can we do if this list closes?

   Please keep it open!

   Jan

   --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, Vance Stevens <vstevens@...> wrote:
   >
   > Thanks Scott, for pausing and reflecting and taking time to reply to
   my
   > message.
   >
   > I think I understand your feelings of attachment and responsibility
   for the
   > Dogme list. You are a recognized leader and guiding light of the list,
   as I
   > am, for that matter, with respect to Webheads. I like to feel that if
   I
   > were to disappear (walk away, whatever) that Webheads would continue.
   I
   > think it's the same with Dogme. Our contributions to the two concepts
   would
   > always be recognized, but both concepts have gained traction to the
   point
   > where there is enough of a critical mass that the interactions and
   > explorations of the concepts will continue in our absence. I've often
   > mentioned this as a kind of a litmus test. If something is truly worth
   > doing, it will continue apart from any individual who might have
   driven it
   > in the first place. There are many ideas driven by a single
   individual, I'm
   > sure you can think of a few, that if that individual stops pushing
   them,
   > they will quickly become forgotten apart from footnotes. Individuals
   > wondering if they should keep promoting those ideas might put
   themselves to
   > that test. If they walk away and the idea is dropped, then the
   decision to
   > move on, for that individual, was probably the right one.
   >
   > So a measure of your success is the fact when you announce that after
   ten
   > years, you are hoping to put a nice wrapping on the package and send
   it off
   > into the time capsule, people actually care!
   >
   > So the question is not, what will happen to Dogme, but what will
   happen to
   > this list. I would argue, and respect your counterarguments, that the
   list
   > is 'owned' by its participants. Considering what I know of social
   dynamics
   > of such movements and what happens to communities when their spaces
   are
   > threatened (look at real communities, like in New Orleans for example)
   the
   > people still exist but with the disappearance of their space,
   something
   > happens to the fabric of their cohesion with one another.
   >
   > So, I would counsel, from that perspective, to consider what happens
   to a
   > community when their homes are bulldozed. They will continue to exist
   and
   > many might regroup in another place, but they will have lost that
   strong
   > connection with a comfortable and vibrant space which they clearly
   > appreciate having. So I would like to (virtually only) symbolically
   and
   > respectfully position myself in the way of the bulldozers and request
   that
   > the courts revisit the demolition order, and perhaps these homes can
   remain
   > standing and the residents continue with the happy interchanges they
   have
   > had for the past ten years in this highly regarded space.
   >
   > Even the sound of barking in such a neighborhood is a welcome backdrop
   to
   > the zeitgeist enjoyed there.
   >
   > Thanks very much for carefully weighing the pros and cons.
   >
   > Vance
   >
   >
   > ----- Original Message -----
   > From: "Scott" <scott.thornbury@...>
   > To: <dogme@yahoogroups.com>
   > Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 2:17 AM
   > Subject: [dogme] Just walk away!
   >
   >
   > >
   > > --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, Vance Stevens <vstevens@> wrote:
   > >
   > >> So I don't understand Scott's reasoning exactly. Why not just leave
   the
   > >> list in place? Why force a move?
   > >>
   > >
   > > Good question,Vance. One that gave me pause. Why DOESN'T dogme seem
   quite
   > > the same as, say, Webheads, and harder, therefore, to walk away
   from? I
   > > think one reason is that, for better or worse, dogme is fairly
   strongly
   > > identified with me, and me with it. In the last 10 years, I've given
   a
   > > lot of workshops and written a lot of articles on the subject of
   dogme,
   > > culminating in the book, Teaching Unplugged, that Luke and I wrote
   last
   > > year. Even though I have probably contributed fewer postings, over
   the
   > > years, than say Rob, or Diarmuid, or Fiona - I am, for many people,
   the
   > > public face of dogme, Mr Dogme, even. Because of these indelible
   > > associations, I feel a certain responsibility to invigilate the
   site, to
   > > keep an eye on it, and to keep it on track, as it were. At the same
   time,
   > > this proprietorial tendency sits uncomfortably with my conviction
   that
   > > dogme DOESN'T belong to me - that it has long since flown the nest,
   so to
   > > speak, and is being reinvented in a variety of exciting ways
   > > (eg. by Howard Vickers in his Avatar Languages, by Anthony Gaughan
   and his
   > > Teacher Training Unplugged, by James Knott and his school in
   > > Ekatarinaburg, and in many other dogme-influenced innovative
   projects).
   > > Closing the Dogme list acknowledges, symbolically, the
   self-propagating
   > > and diversifying nature of dogme, while at the same time it releases
   me
   > > from the (sometimes stifling) sense of this close identification
   with
   > > dogme.
   > >
   > > I guess I feel that if I tried to walk away, the dogme site would
   follow
   > > me, heaving itself across the sand like a wounded sea-cow, barking
   > > plaintively...
   > >
   > > (Or is it me who is barking?)
   > >
   >




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Oh dear

I voted (chose three statements with which I concur) and clicked on :"vote"
but then the list of statements came back with all three choices still
marked - so I clicked once more... and again the list came back as before
and now I don't know whether I voted once, twice or not at all? in any case
please Scott this is my vote: I think that the list could be handed over to
the members, I think that dogme will survive without the list and I think
that it is no longer so much about dogme as about,... etc

do hope that the first and second statements are not mutually exclusive.

Zosia


dogme@yahoogroups.com napisa³(a):

   Dear Scott, dear all

   I can't believe this list is 10 years old - it's been a pleasure to
   lurk! Thanks to all who had the energy and generosity to share their
   thoughts and ideas.

   I found this the other day in the recent Allwright/Hanks book, `The
   developing learner' (which also references dogme, BTW) - `Teachers
   should think for themselves and never accept any idea on trust'. Sums up
   this list and dogme generally for me...

   All the best

   graham




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Enter your vote today!  A new poll has been created for the
dogme group:

As the tenth anniversary of this list approaches, you are invited to agree or
disagree with the following statements:

   o The dogme discussion list has run out of steam.
   o Dogme has outlived the need for this list.
   o This list is less about dogme than a community of teachers with shared
values and concerns.
   o If this list were to close, dogme would survive.
   o The present list should be 'handed over' to its members.
   o The dogme list should be closed as of March 9th.


To vote, please visit the following web page:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dogme/surveys?id=2952364

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups
web site listed above.

Thanks!

Hmmm...



Call me a commie, but I think communities such as this are less about the
person (or people) who started them, and more about the people who live in
them and contribute to them. Deciding to close down a community is a
top-down decision and it doesn't take into account all the members of that
community who made it successful, and continue to live in it. It's about
leaving the space intact for those people who still wish to spend time there
and talk to each other. I think it should stay until the last member turns
out the lights...



And besides, where else am I going to get my regular dose of 'beam me up,
Scotty' jibes and conference talk content? ;-)



Best,



Gavin





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Scott has just written, amd Vance and Gavin, and I thought I'd say what is
going through my head, just in case it helps anyone who is trying to decide
how to vote.

(1)  I always thought it interesting and to the list's credit that it
attracted people like Vance,Gavin and Grham Stanley, for example, who we
think of, rightly or wrongly, as belonging to other worlds. It seems that
there were sometimes messages of general educaitonal interest here, not just
minority interest propoganda.

(2)   For some time I've had an intuition, nothing more substantial than
that, that it was time for the list to transform in some way - be
refurbished, use a different platform, be under new management not (not,
not, not, not....) because there was anything at all wrong with the present
management, but because the list itself seemed to be changing with the times
and, I felt, that change could be usefully marked in some appropriate
fashion.

The poll is a great idea for the obvious reason - it is democratic.

As I write I feel  I'll still go with the decision that supports moving into
new premises, as it were, but with the same beliefs and priorities and, I
believe and hope, a core of transferred present members. Pre-2010 Dogme is
(just about?) dead. Long live Dogme.

(That's partly just rhetoric, of course. Dogme certainly is not dead - it is
just changing and acknowledging its own change).

Rob, Luke, Dr. Evil - a penny for your thoughts.


Dennis

On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Gavin Dudeney <dudeney@...> wrote:

> Hmmm...
>
>
>
> Call me a commie, but I think communities such as this are less about the
> person (or people) who started them, and more about the people who live in
> them and contribute to them. Deciding to close down a community is a
> top-down decision and it doesn't take into account all the members of that
> community who made it successful, and continue to live in it. It's about
> leaving the space intact for those people who still wish to spend time
> there
> and talk to each other. I think it should stay until the last member turns
> out the lights...
>
>
>
> And besides, where else am I going to get my regular dose of 'beam me up,
> Scotty' jibes and conference talk content? ;-)
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Gavin
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> To Post a message, send it to:   dogme@eGroups.com
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: dogme-unsubscribe@...!
> Groups Links
>
>
>
>


--
Dennis Newson, retired,
Formerly: University of Osnabrück.
Webhead, member of SLexperiments.
Moderator OWL and YLTSIG lists,
Member of IATEFL YLTSIG committee
Moderator Discussions & List Manager YLTSIG.
Resident of Second Life.
Founder of a number of TEFL lists.
http://www.dennisnewson.de


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear group,

I am another faithful Webhead....(intrigued by Dogme) and Vance, you did it
again!  So beautifully said, and I agree:


  I would argue, and respect your counterarguments, that the list
> is 'owned' by its participants.


> So, I would counsel, from that perspective, to consider what happens to a
> community when their homes are bulldozed.  They will continue to exist and
> many might regroup in another place, but they will have lost that strong
> connection with a comfortable and vibrant space which they clearly
> appreciate having.  So I would like to (virtually only) symbolically and
> respectfully position myself in the way of the bulldozers and request that
> the courts revisit the demolition order, and perhaps these homes can remain
> standing and the residents continue with the happy interchanges they have
> had for the past ten years in this highly regarded space.
>
> Even the sound of barking in such a neighborhood is a welcome backdrop to
> the zeitgeist enjoyed there.

:-) Susan in Italy

Scott,



Another thought occurs to me... in your original 'close down' message you
point to the existence of discussions happening on blogs, Second Life and
Twitter as evidence that dogme can live on outside this group. Yet over the
past year you've been at pains to suggest that many 'platforms' do not
promote real discussions (Twitter), that many people do not have access to
more advanced technologies (Second Life), etc.



You and I have (even) agreed that in terms of training, real critical
thinking and discussion best happens in things such as discussion forums.



So, if that's the case, what better platform for dogme could there be than
one which works for most people (in terms of technical knowledge and
infrastructure) and one which allows for deeper discussion? Or are we
heading for 'dogme McNuggets' as everyone moves the discussion to Twitter
once their home has been demolished?



Best,



Gavin





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Gavin,

Iff ('if and only if') Dogme is closed down and a phoenix arises I'm almost
certain Fiona will keep it as a Yahoogoups list precisely for your sorts of
reasons.


Dennis


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear all

As so many among us I have wondered and pondered about Scott's message.

The prevalent feeling in my head is that I would surely miss the
"discussion group" if it came to be wound up. We may sometimes have
different bees in our bonnets, so that some threads lead to a more
active and dynamic debate, than others, but after a while stories
often went back to (for me) the essence; experiences of teaching
unplugged.

I can understand, however, that for "godfather" (and I mean this in
the Christian and not the Marlon Brando way) Scott, this group may
feel as a responsibility. Children and parents do not always go their
separate ways with ease. Maybe it is indeed time for Scott to let go
of his Dogme children.
I do sincerely hope that now and then he will keep lurking in or even
sometimes posting. If not I look forward to occasional mail and
twitter communication.

And for the rest of us:
Don't stop the clocks, don't cut off the telephone
For even now something can come to any good.

Best regards
Bruno
--
Bruno Leys
KHBO - teacher training - Bruges, Belgium
tel.: 0032 (0)477/856706

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

I think Scott is right in saying dogme has run its course in the eyes of its
creator. On the other hand, it is a vibrant community and it would be a shame to
close it down. Let's simply declare it an open list and leave it at that and see
where it goes. In fact, if we can "liberate" the list from the shackles of an
identity- it may prosper more...as it is now, I feel it has become a tech versus
non-tech competition which I find rathee unproductive.

So let's free the list from dogme and save it at the same time as a free and
open community of practice

On Di 02. Mrz, 2010 18:40 CET Gavin Dudeney wrote:

>Scott,
>
>
>
>Another thought occurs to me... in your original 'close down' message you
>point to the existence of discussions happening on blogs, Second Life and
>Twitter as evidence that dogme can live on outside this group. Yet over the
>past year you've been at pains to suggest that many 'platforms' do not
>promote real discussions (Twitter), that many people do not have access to
>more advanced technologies (Second Life), etc.
>
>
>
>You and I have (even) agreed that in terms of training, real critical
>thinking and discussion best happens in things such as discussion forums.
>
>
>
>So, if that's the case, what better platform for dogme could there be than
>one which works for most people (in terms of technical knowledge and
>infrastructure) and one which allows for deeper discussion? Or are we
>heading for 'dogme McNuggets' as everyone moves the discussion to Twitter
>once their home has been demolished?
>
>
>
>Best,
>
>
>
>Gavin
>
>
>
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz gegen
Massenmails.
http://mail.yahoo.com

Gavin, you're a Commie.

And I happen to agree with you.  While I initially said I understood
and agreed with the desire and decision to close the group down, I did
have the same misgivings as you, Lance, Karenne, Jane and others.  I
see both sides of this but I thought a decision has clearly been made
and so disagreement would be shutting the barn door after the horse
has bolted (model mindless citizen me, hardly the "Critical Thinker"
that this forum seems otherwise teeming with ;-).

Seems like "public outcry", though, has swayed the "leadership" to
consider the views of "the masses", as it were (would never have
happened under the Communists, eh, Gavin? ;-) ...)

It's clearly the case that Scott and at least one of the other
founding members are no longer comfortable with at least their
relationship with the e-group (as an object, requiring attention and
accountability, not as a community of people, judging from what Scott
says).  It's also the case that at least 10 (but not many more judging
from the number of responses to the announcement) members of the group
feel disenfranchised by this decision to mothball the list.

Perhaps Scott, Luke et al have no "right" to lock the group down "from
the top", but they certainly have the power.  "Son of Dogme" could
always be called into being but it wouldn't be the same - something
will have changed.

The poll seems like an indication that the execution may yet be stayed
- am I right?  After all, between control and responsibility on the
one hand and shutting up shop and making steam aways from the Sea-Cows
(slightly narked at that comparison, by the way!) on the other hand,
there is a wide ocean of options to explore (which would mean, of
course, you can avoid all those Sea Cows on your tail shouting - or
barking, or mooing, or whatever Sea Cows do -  "SPLITTER!!!" (remember
Life of Brian?) as you sail off into the sunset.

I'd like the list to continue to exist, partly because I haven't yet
needled Gavin with a "Sad Trekkie" riposte and he seems to like it
when this happens, partly because I often like the conversations here,
even when I don't feel like I have anything to actively contribute.

A statement in the poll (The list has run out of steam) perhaps has
some immediate truth in it (note, I only say perhaps).  But if this IS
true,  take the long view of this "long conversation" - every dialogue
has its whizz-bang moments and then its moments where it seems more
opportune to visit the bar, but this doesn't mean that the
conversation won't find new impetus if you let it.  And Scott, if you
agree with the first statement on the poll yourself, do you really
want to leave it at a point where:

"So this is the way the world (or e-List) ends/The World ends/This is
the way the World ends/Not with a Bang but a Whimper" (after T.S.
Eliot - possibly wildly inaccurately..)

Just a thought.  Mr. Scott, beam me up.

Anthony
-----------
My blog on attempts to square Dogme with CELTA courses:
http://teachertrainingunplugged.wordpress.com
----------

On Mar 2, 2010, at 3:40 PM, Gavin Dudeney wrote:

> Hmmm...
>
> Call me a commie, but I think communities such as this are less
> about the
> person (or people) who started them, and more about the people who
> live in
> them and contribute to them. Deciding to close down a community is a
> top-down decision and it doesn't take into account all the members
> of that
> community who made it successful, and continue to live in it. It's
> about
> leaving the space intact for those people who still wish to spend
> time there
> and talk to each other. I think it should stay until the last member
> turns
> out the lights...
>
> And besides, where else am I going to get my regular dose of 'beam
> me up,
> Scotty' jibes and conference talk content? ;-)
>
> Best,
>
> Gavin
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Dennis,

I always thought you were of another world as well, most recently an
effective user of second life.

And to all ...

If I may suggest, just to open up more possibilities, members of a community
don't have to stay entirely within the community.  They can branch out into
new spaces.  Again taking the model of Webheads, we started off in certain
spaces and we still occupy those spaces, YahooGroups and TappedIn to mention
two, that at first glance might appear to be old technology and thus to have
outlived their usefulness.  However, both still serve certain functions
within the community and are continually populated by certain subsets of our
participants.

Meanwhile there is nothing to stop any member of Webheads or Dogme from
opening up new spaces.  One I particularly recommend is Ning, but Gavin has
mentioned Twitter http://twitter.com/#search?q=dogme

Going there I find that Scott points to his blog and this posting here:
http://scottthornbury.wordpress.com/2010/02/28/d-is-for-dogme/ and we can
carry on the discussion here as well.

Here Scott says (among other things) "the exponential growth in educational
technologies since 2000 represents a challenge to dogme that might be best
met in new venues and with a different audience."  Yes, agreed, and it is
healthy for a community to branch out into new spaces, as it is clearly
doing.

However, as we also acknowledge different modalities and preferences with
our students, we should avoid disaffecting those who have grown comfortable
with the list modality.  So my argument is that it is simply not necessary
to pull the plug (to unplug?) that. I am simply suggesting that the list be
left in place for those who are comfortable there.

But I think it would be good for the discussion to branch out into other
venues, as it's going to do anyway, since it now has a life of its own.  I'm
sure there are many here who could be comfortable in this list and in
several of these other spaces as well, among them those mentioned above. I'm
only suggesting that this space, where you are reading this, still has
vitality, and we'll see the result of the poll and await Scott's decision
whether to let this list continue or draw the line here.

Thanks for listening and for putting the issue up for vote,

Vance




----- Original Message -----
From: "Dennis Newson" <djn@...>
To: <dogme@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 7:11 PM
Subject: Re: [dogme] Dogme Group Death


Scott has just written, amd Vance and Gavin, and I thought I'd say what is
going through my head, just in case it helps anyone who is trying to decide
how to vote.

(1)  I always thought it interesting and to the list's credit that it
attracted people like Vance,Gavin and Grham Stanley, for example, who we
think of, rightly or wrongly, as belonging to other worlds. It seems that
there were sometimes messages of general educaitonal interest here, not just
minority interest propoganda.

(2)   For some time I've had an intuition, nothing more substantial than
that, that it was time for the list to transform in some way - be
refurbished, use a different platform, be under new management not (not,
not, not, not....) because there was anything at all wrong with the present
management, but because the list itself seemed to be changing with the times
and, I felt, that change could be usefully marked in some appropriate
fashion.

The poll is a great idea for the obvious reason - it is democratic.

As I write I feel  I'll still go with the decision that supports moving into
new premises, as it were, but with the same beliefs and priorities and, I
believe and hope, a core of transferred present members. Pre-2010 Dogme is
(just about?) dead. Long live Dogme.

(That's partly just rhetoric, of course. Dogme certainly is not dead - it is
just changing and acknowledging its own change).

Rob, Luke, Dr. Evil - a penny for your thoughts.


Dennis

On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Gavin Dudeney <dudeney@...> wrote:

> Hmmm...
>
>
>
> Call me a commie, but I think communities such as this are less about the
> person (or people) who started them, and more about the people who live in
> them and contribute to them. Deciding to close down a community is a
> top-down decision and it doesn't take into account all the members of that
> community who made it successful, and continue to live in it. It's about
> leaving the space intact for those people who still wish to spend time
> there
> and talk to each other. I think it should stay until the last member turns
> out the lights...
>
>
>
> And besides, where else am I going to get my regular dose of 'beam me up,
> Scotty' jibes and conference talk content? ;-)
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Gavin
>

Right on! It's time for the leader to choose a new electorate. Clearly he's
bored with the old one...

--- On Wed, 3/3/10, Vance Stevens <vstevens@...> wrote:

From: Vance Stevens <vstevens@...>
Subject: Re: [dogme] Dogme Group Death
To: dogme@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, 3 March, 2010, 4:39







 









       Hi Dennis,



I always thought you were of another world as well, most recently an

effective user of second life.



And to all ...



If I may suggest, just to open up more possibilities, members of a community

don't have to stay entirely within the community.  They can branch out into

new spaces.  Again taking the model of Webheads, we started off in certain

spaces and we still occupy those spaces, YahooGroups and TappedIn to mention

two, that at first glance might appear to be old technology and thus to have

outlived their usefulness.  However, both still serve certain functions

within the community and are continually populated by certain subsets of our

participants.



Meanwhile there is nothing to stop any member of Webheads or Dogme from

opening up new spaces.  One I particularly recommend is Ning, but Gavin has

mentioned Twitter http://twitter. com/#search? q=dogme



Going there I find that Scott points to his blog and this posting here:

http://scottthornbu ry.wordpress. com/2010/ 02/28/d-is- for-dogme/ and we can

carry on the discussion here as well.



Here Scott says (among other things) "the exponential growth in educational

technologies since 2000 represents a challenge to dogme that might be best

met in new venues and with a different audience."  Yes, agreed, and it is

healthy for a community to branch out into new spaces, as it is clearly

doing.



However, as we also acknowledge different modalities and preferences with

our students, we should avoid disaffecting those who have grown comfortable

with the list modality.  So my argument is that it is simply not necessary

to pull the plug (to unplug?) that. I am simply suggesting that the list be

left in place for those who are comfortable there.



But I think it would be good for the discussion to branch out into other

venues, as it's going to do anyway, since it now has a life of its own.  I'm

sure there are many here who could be comfortable in this list and in

several of these other spaces as well, among them those mentioned above. I'm

only suggesting that this space, where you are reading this, still has

vitality, and we'll see the result of the poll and await Scott's decision

whether to let this list continue or draw the line here.



Thanks for listening and for putting the issue up for vote,



Vance



----- Original Message -----

From: "Dennis Newson" <djn@dennisnewson. de>

To: <dogme@yahoogroups. com>

Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 7:11 PM

Subject: Re: [dogme] Dogme Group Death



Scott has just written, amd Vance and Gavin, and I thought I'd say what is

going through my head, just in case it helps anyone who is trying to decide

how to vote.



(1)  I always thought it interesting and to the list's credit that it

attracted people like Vance,Gavin and Grham Stanley, for example, who we

think of, rightly or wrongly, as belonging to other worlds. It seems that

there were sometimes messages of general educaitonal interest here, not just

minority interest propoganda.



(2)   For some time I've had an intuition, nothing more substantial than

that, that it was time for the list to transform in some way - be

refurbished, use a different platform, be under new management not (not,

not, not, not....) because there was anything at all wrong with the present

management, but because the list itself seemed to be changing with the times

and, I felt, that change could be usefully marked in some appropriate

fashion.



The poll is a great idea for the obvious reason - it is democratic.



As I write I feel  I'll still go with the decision that supports moving into

new premises, as it were, but with the same beliefs and priorities and, I

believe and hope, a core of transferred present members. Pre-2010 Dogme is

(just about?) dead. Long live Dogme.



(That's partly just rhetoric, of course. Dogme certainly is not dead - it is

just changing and acknowledging its own change).



Rob, Luke, Dr. Evil - a penny for your thoughts.



Dennis



On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Gavin Dudeney <dudeney@gmail. com> wrote:



> Hmmm...

>

>

>

> Call me a commie, but I think communities such as this are less about the

> person (or people) who started them, and more about the people who live in

> them and contribute to them. Deciding to close down a community is a

> top-down decision and it doesn't take into account all the members of that

> community who made it successful, and continue to live in it. It's about

> leaving the space intact for those people who still wish to spend time

> there

> and talk to each other. I think it should stay until the last member turns

> out the lights...

>

>

>

> And besides, where else am I going to get my regular dose of 'beam me up,

> Scotty' jibes and conference talk content? ;-)

>

>

>

> Best,

>

>

>

> Gavin

>

























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I thought you might be interested to see my last post on this list before I
became a lurker, over 7 years ago.

Coincidentally, it was also about closing down the list!

I don't know if Yahoogroup rules for moderators and owners have changed since
2002.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Hi all and Scott.

Well, I haven't been active in the group for some time. Why? you might ask.
Well, as Rhys Ifans says somewhere, "Combination of factors, really." More
of that another time.

Anyway, the Dogme group has (quick check...) 158 members and regularly gets
up to 10 messages per day. The idea that it should suddenly disappear is as
Spock would say, "Illogical."

At the present time the list has only one moderator and one owner (by
definition). According to Yahoogroup! rules the owner can eliminate the list
at will.

Scott, if it doesn't speak to you anymore, I suggest you simply pass the
list on. There are two degrees for this. One: You appoint another
Moderator(s) (with privileges that you set). Two: You pass on ownership of
the list to another member, after which you can unsubscribe if you wish.

But there is no reason why the list should agree to collectively disappear.

There are so many lists out there that would love to have 158 members and
even a tiff or two.

Whatever is decided, many congratulations to all of you for a great time and
much inspirational reading.

But my vote is not cast.

All the seasonal best,

Richard

Hello everyone, I've been surprised to read that the group is possibly comming
to an end. I haven't been an "active" member but I've read your posts and
followed the discussions almost every day since I joined, I've learnt a lot of
things, tried some others with my students, followed some online courses
suggested by you and the most important I've dared to do new things in the
classroom. I am deeply grateful of the group and its members, specially the
moderators, I'd like DOGME to continue, but it's all in your hands.
Thanks again from Chile.

surprising spate of postings from lurkers and members who like me used to be
active then eased off but are still very much attached  - and it seems
obvious that the list fulfills needs of many. eh, Scott?

Zosia

dogme@yahoogroups.com napisa³(a):

   Hello everyone, I've been surprised to read that the group is possibly
   comming to an end. I haven't been an "active" member but I've read your
   posts and followed the discussions almost every day since I joined, I've
   learnt a lot of things, tried some others with my students, followed
   some online courses suggested by you and the most important I've dared
   to do new things in the classroom. I am deeply grateful of the group and
   its members, specially the moderators, I'd like DOGME to continue, but
   it's all in your hands.
   Thanks again from Chile.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi,

writing on a tiny screen so this'll be short.
It's Wednesday night, and I said I'd start up a dogme 2.0 list on Friday if I
got around 25 off-list emails by 9pm GMT on Friday.
Well, I've had 21 so far, so... it seems likely.
I also intend to explore Ning as an option - otherwise the Phonexi will have
'yahoo' tattood on its back.


IF and only IF I get those remaining messages, I'll let you know on Saturday.

And Zosia, interestingly, more than half the off-list messages have come from
'lurkers' not regular posters, and more than half are from women! Definitely an
unusual balance for dogme....


'See' everyone at the weekend, either with a dogme 2.0 url, or to say 'ciao,
hasta luego, and thanks for the fish'.

fiona


--- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, pannazosia@... wrote:
>
> surprising spate of postings from lurkers and members who like me used to be
> active then eased off but are still very much attached  - and it seems
> obvious that the list fulfills needs of many. eh, Scott?
>
> Zosia
>
> dogme@yahoogroups.com napisa³(a):
>
>   Hello everyone, I've been surprised to read that the group is possibly
>   comming to an end. I haven't been an "active" member but I've read your
>   posts and followed the discussions almost every day since I joined, I've
>   learnt a lot of things, tried some others with my students, followed
>   some online courses suggested by you and the most important I've dared
>   to do new things in the classroom. I am deeply grateful of the group and
>   its members, specially the moderators, I'd like DOGME to continue, but
>   it's all in your hands.
>   Thanks again from Chile.
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Hi Fiona,

You might need your binoculars to read this on the tiny screen...

I've used Ning with another group, and I really like it much more than
Yahoo! for what it's worth.

Also, I wonder how interactive and vibrant a forum of lurkers might
be. :-)

Rob


On Mar 3, 2010, at 4:55 PM, fiotf wrote:

> Hi,
>
> writing on a tiny screen so this'll be short.
> It's Wednesday night, and I said I'd start up a dogme 2.0 list on
> Friday if I got around 25 off-list emails by 9pm GMT on Friday.
> Well, I've had 21 so far, so... it seems likely.
> I also intend to explore Ning as an option - otherwise the Phonexi
> will have 'yahoo' tattood on its back.
>
> IF and only IF I get those remaining messages, I'll let you know on
> Saturday.
>
> And Zosia, interestingly, more than half the off-list messages have
> come from 'lurkers' not regular posters, and more than half are from
> women! Definitely an unusual balance for dogme....
>
> 'See' everyone at the weekend, either with a dogme 2.0 url, or to
> say 'ciao, hasta luego, and thanks for the fish'.
>
> fiona
>
>
> --- In dogme@yahoogroups.com, pannazosia@... wrote:
> >
> > surprising spate of postings from lurkers and members who like me
> used to be
> > active then eased off but are still very much attached - and it
> seems
> > obvious that the list fulfills needs of many. eh, Scott?
> >
> > Zosia
> >
> > dogme@yahoogroups.com napisa³(a):
> >
> > Hello everyone, I've been surprised to read that the group is
> possibly
> > comming to an end. I haven't been an "active" member but I've read
> your
> > posts and followed the discussions almost every day since I
> joined, I've
> > learnt a lot of things, tried some others with my students, followed
> > some online courses suggested by you and the most important I've
> dared
> > to do new things in the classroom. I am deeply grateful of the
> group and
> > its members, specially the moderators, I'd like DOGME to continue,
> but
> > it's all in your hands.
> > Thanks again from Chile.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

another oh-no lurker here. read and archive all messages since dunno-when.
congrats and hope it goes on.
gagah


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]