[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

GSBN: Digest for 12/15/04



This message contains a digest of the messages posted to the list today. If
you reply to this message, please be sure to change the subject line to
something meaningful. Also, be careful not to include the entire text of this
message in your reply.


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


-> Re: GSBN:Re: Proposal
     by Rene Dalmeijer rene.dalmeijer@...
-> Re: GSBN:Re: Proposal
     by Judyknox42@...
-> Nyet to "Secret" GSBN
     by Rob Tom rw_tom@...
-> Re: GSBN:Re: Proposal
     by billc_lists@...
-> Re: GSBN
     by Strawnet@...
-> Re: GSBN:Re: Proposal
     by Bruce King ecobruce@...
-> Re: GSBN:Re: Proposal
     by Bruce King ecobruce@...


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

Date: 15 Dec 2004 07:08:38 -0600
From: Rene Dalmeijer rene.dalmeijer@...
Subject: Re: GSBN:Re: Proposal

Paul,

I concur with your views on this matter there is no easy way out.

What I suggest though is continue on the line we have done in the past
and depend on the digression of the list members to decide if
discussions should go via the list or person to person a practice I am
sure many of the members already do. This does mean that there is a
risk of invoking too much self censorship and thus loosing opinionated
discussions which have raised and resolved important issues in the
past.

I will certainly continue my current practice and am definitly inspired
by discussions fueled by contributions such as recently fired by 'Rob
the ray' and 'drying bales Hank'.


On Dec 14, 2004, at 23:58, Paul Lacinski wrote:

> The problem is that in discussing new potential members (and in other
> not so theoretical situations) we are airing our opinions of other
> people's professional reputations.  We have to do this.  The paradox
> that I see is an ethical requirement to be honest with each other,
> without defaming anyone in public, or releasing information that
> could be used by one party or another in lawsuits, etc.
>
> I don't have a great idea for a way out of this bind.  Since I'm not
> much of a computer guy, I wonder whether there is some way to deal
> with it technologically- a GSBNXXX list whose records are sealed to
> the wider public?  My main intention is to intruduce this concern, to
> see whether it is shared by others.
>
Rene



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

Date: 15 Dec 2004 12:40:04 -0600
From: Judyknox42@...
Subject: Re: GSBN:Re: Proposal

Judy Knox here. Matts and I embrace the comments from Paul and Rene on the
larger issues surrounding Rob's message to the GSBN.  Matts and I have
discussed
this, and have a response to a specific component of the issue.

We have watched the GSBN evolve into it's own useful and powerful purpose of
communication between the international straw-bale community.  And even though
there was an original intent to restrict participation to network leaders
from differing geographical areas, and even though that still has some
validity,
we think it is less important than it once was.  After all, Matts and I and
David Eisenburg live in the same town;  Derek Roff and Catherine Wanek live
close-by each other in New Mexico; Martin and Rene both represent similar
networks
in the Netherlands, etc, etc.  What we do think is crucial is that there is a
participant from each geographical area or network that makes sure
information is being passed on to others in that area.  But beyond that, we
are much
more interested in the quality of the contributions participants make to a
free-flowing dialogue.  None of us want the GSBN to turn into a chat room, and
should that begin to happen, we need to address it.  But so far, we think the
dialogue represents alot of good experience and knowledge, is interesting,
useful,
of a pretty high caliber and connects us to each other in important ways.  We
really don't care whether too many are from Ontario or any other geographic
area.  Again, the quality and content of a free-flowing dialogue that helps us
all move forward in our work is the point.
We don't know Hank, but have no reason not to welcome him if other members of
the GSBN feel he can contribute at that level. As for you, Rob, you have
always been a knowledgeable, witty and important contributor, and we wouldn't
want
to see you change that in any way.  We just don't see it as an "either/or"
situation.

And we'd like to add how much we admire and love the international straw-bale
community...many individually...and collectively...you represent the
thoughtful, intentional, generous-spirited, caring community we would wish to
live in
and clone throughout this distressed world.  You truly enrich our lives and
work.
We wish you all a new year filled with loving, life-affirming livingry.
Judy and Matts

Judy Knox and Matts Myhrman
Out On Bale
1037 E. Linden St.
Tucson, Az  85719
520-622-6896
judyknox42@...
mattsmyhrman@...

Each of us can and must champion the evolutionary breakthroughs necessary to
sustain all life.  The journey of a champion is difficult, AND our access to a
joyful life.
Judy Knox


- --- This list does not allow attachments or HTML mail.  ---
- ---The notes below outline what was removed. ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
- ---


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

Date: 15 Dec 2004 12:53:58 -0600
From: Rob Tom rw_tom@...
Subject: Nyet to "Secret" GSBN

billc_lists@...

>I'm not in favor of starting a second, secret GSBN list,


I can understand that there might be a desire to limit accessibility
in order to limit the volume of email that needs to be filtered from
one's mailbox but I think that there are better ways to filter email.

If it's a matter of keeping discussion on this list more rigorous, I
think that that boat has long sailed.

If it's a matter of limiting access to the information presented in
this forum, if anything, I would prefer to see the information
presented on this list made *more* accessible.

Not all that long ago, people from all around the world who shared a
common interest in SBC were able to share information and discussion
through one list; the CREST SB listserve.

Now there is this list for "professionals" only,  another list for
Europeans, others for Californians, Okies, strictly SB,
not-so-strictly SB,  etc. and almost no intercourse amongst the bunch
and IMO, that's not a Good Thing.

As far as Hank Carr's proposed membership and OSBBC representation on
this List, we already have that in the person of Chris Magwood (who I
assume speaks to Tina Therrien (Treasurer of OSBBC and partner of
Chris) now and then. Then there's John Straube and I, also from
southern Ontario.
OTOH, there is a dearth of representation from other areas of Canada,
most notably (IMO) the absence of Kim Thompson from Nova Scotia and
no one from the Prairie provinces.

    ~~~ * ~~~
     Robert W. Tom
  Kanata, Ontario, Canada
ArchiLogic@...


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

Date: 15 Dec 2004 13:33:03 -0600
From: billc_lists@...
Subject: Re: GSBN:Re: Proposal

At 1:17 PM -0500 12/15/04, Judyknox42@...:

>What we do think is crucial is that there is a
>participant from each geographical area or network that makes sure
>information is being passed on to others in that area.  But beyond
>that, we are much
>more interested in the quality of the contributions participants make to a
>free-flowing dialogue.  None of us want the GSBN to turn into a chat room,
and
>should that begin to happen, we need to address it.


>...The quality and content of a free-flowing dialogue that helps us
>all move forward in our work is the point.
>We don't know Hank, but have no reason not to welcome him if other members of
the GSBN feel he can contribute at that level.

I agree wholeheartedly with Judy's point that we don't need to
restrict ourselves to some quota from different locations (though I'd
certainly like to see more representation from certain areas of the
world), and that what really matters is the quality and content of
discussion.

That said, another list member's comments to me offline and presented
here anonymously:

"The question of Hank is less clear. Obviously he's a busy and
dedicated person with the best intentions, but he scares me in the
same way that a certain couple of guys in Minnesota used to scare me.
(You'll recall that one of their projects - a very well-intended but
excruciatingly-flawed SB house built in south Minneapolis - ended up
torn down a couple years later because of moisture problems. They
ignored hard-won consensus- and experience-derived wisdom and best
practices of the SB community, preferring to "pioneer" techniques and
designs that relied on flawed assumptions and poor judgement.
Eventually they posted a message on their website saying that they
didn't have anything to do with strawbale anymore; and now their
website appears to be gone completely.) While I can't deny that Hank
is moving and shaking, I'm not comfortable that he's not a bull in a
china shop. Where SB is concerned, when having a vision blurs with
solipsism, I cringe. But then again, maybe his apparent belligerence
would be tempered in the presence of the august GSBNers. If it comes
down to a choice between RT and him, I'd choose RT in a heartbeat."


(billc again)
Rob has been the most vocal in his opposition to having Hank join,
but several others who know him through list discussions or otherwise
have some reservations.  I suggest that unless we get some strong
arguments from people who are familiar with Hank and feel that his
inclusion in the list would be a positive thing overall, that we
don't invite him to join GSBN at present.

- --
Bill Christensen
<<a  target="_blank" href="http://sustainablesources.com/contact/";>http://sustainablesources.com/contact/</a>>

Green Building Professionals Directory: <<a  target="_blank" href="http://directory.sustainablesources.com";>http://directory.sustainablesources.com</a>>
Sustainable Building Calendar: <<a  target="_blank" href="http://SustainableSources.com/calendar/";>http://SustainableSources.com/calendar/</a>>
Green Real Estate: <<a  target="_blank" href="http://SustainableSources.com/realestate/";>http://SustainableSources.com/realestate/</a>>
Straw Bale Registry: <<a  target="_blank" href="http://sbregistry.sustainablesources.com/";>http://sbregistry.sustainablesources.com/</a>>
Books/videos/software: <<a  target="_blank" href="http://bookstore.sustainablesources.com/";>http://bookstore.sustainablesources.com/</a>>


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

Date: 15 Dec 2004 13:47:26 -0600
From: Strawnet@...
Subject: Re: GSBN

I would like to echo Judy and Matts' sentiments and add a couple of
thoughts. Although lately there has been a lot of discussion on this
listserve on this listserve, I think it's been useful, important and
nearly entirely constructive.

This forum is of great value for a variety of reasons. Thinking back to
its origins and the structure we created for it - an invitation only list
- - the main concern we had was that we (practitioners, researchers,
professionals [I use that term with caution because it often has
different meanings and connotations for different people]) needed a place
for exchanging ideas, experiences, information, questions, etc. that
would not be continually plagued by the need to explain everything at the
beginner level, not have a lot of traffic on the basic topics that people
could find elsewhere, leaving us free to focus on the larger and in some
cases more complex or techical matters, or matters that were of concern
to some of us who were "leaders" or stewards of this movement.

In other words, we wanted a forum in which we would focus on things at a
more advanced or knowledgeable level, not to be exclusive for elitist
reasons but for the practical ones - including not having to spend hours
sorting through messages dealing with the basic newbie questions that
we'd all been answering for years, to find the level of information that
was of interest and concern to us. Many have stayed active in those other
lists and a few of us, myself included have had to pull back from them
because of other commitments or focus.

Speaking just for myself, I value this list immensely because of the
quality of the voices here, the strong tendency not to abuse the
privilege of being included, and, as Judy noted, the incredible
generosity of spirit that resides here. I have no problem with others
having access to the archives of the list, though I can imagine some
circumstances in which that might be problematic. But clearly, there is
much discussion here that is of great value and should available to
people who could benefit from it. I just don't want to open this list to
anyone who would clog it up with questions and suggestions that aren't
conducive to the level of dialogue we experience now.

I can't speak to the issue of Hank Carr's membership on the list because
I don't know him or his work, though my tendency is toward inclusion
rather than exclusion if the person in question has something of
substance to offer to this community at an appropriate level that they
can contribute constructively. One the the issue that Rob raised, if Kim
Thompson, from Nova Scotia, is not a member, or Habib Gonzalez from
British Columbia for that matter, I would propose them now strongly
because of their past contributions and what they have to offer.

Finally, some of you may have gotten my thanksgiving message of a few
weeks ago, which included this from the writing of the late physicist,
David Bohm, from his wonderful little book, On Dialogue:
In this book, which is about real communication, Bohm explains that his
meaning for the word "dialogue" is somewhat different from common usage.
He points out that the word comes from the Greek word "dialogos." Logos
means "the word," or the "meaning of the word." And "dia" means "through"
not "two." A dialogue can be among any number of people. Bohm writes,
"The picture or image that this derivation suggests is of a stream of
meaning flowing among and through us and between us." "In...a dialogue,
when one person says something, the other person does not in general
respond with exactly the same meaning as that seen by the first person.
Rather, the meanings are only similar and not identical. Thus, when the
second person replies, the first person sees a difference between what he
meant to say and what the other person understood. On considering this
difference, he may then be able to see something new, which is relevant
both to his own views and to those of the other person. And so it can go
back and forth, with the continual emergence of a new content that is
common to both participants. Thus in dialogue, each person does not
attempt to make common certain ideas or items of information that are
already known to him. Rather, it may be said that the two people are
making something in common, i.e., creating something new together."

Bohm continues, "But of course such communication can lead to the
creation of something new only if people are able freely to listen to
each other, without prejudice, and without trying to influence each
other. Each has to be interested primarily in truth and coherence, so
that he is ready to drop his old ideas and intentions, and be ready to go
on to something different, when this is called for."

What I have appreciated above all else in this GSBN community, is that
true dialogue often occurs here and I hope we can appreciate and work to
preserve this as a safe space in which we can have real dialogue.

With warmest regards,

David

David Eisenberg

************************************************
Out beyond ideas of wrong-doing and right-doing,
there is a field. I'll meet you there.
When the soul lies down in that grass
the world is too full to talk about;
ideas, language, even the phrase "each other"
doesn't make any sense.
    -Rumi
************************************************




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

Date: 15 Dec 2004 16:07:54 -0600
From: Bruce King ecobruce@...
Subject: Re: GSBN:Re: Proposal


On Dec 15, 2004, at 10:17 AM, Judyknox42@...:

>  . . . We don't know Hank, but have no reason not to welcome him if
> other members of
> the GSBN feel he can contribute at that level. As for you, Rob, you
> have
> always been a knowledgeable, witty and important contributor, and we
> wouldn't want
> to see you change that in any way.  We just don't see it as an
> "either/or"
> situation.
>
> And we'd like to add how much we admire and love the international
> straw-bale
> community...many individually...and collectively...you represent the
> thoughtful, intentional, generous-spirited, caring community we would
> wish to live in
> and clone throughout this distressed world.  You truly enrich our
> lives and
> work.
> We wish you all a new year filled with loving, life-affirming livingry.




Thank you, Judy and Matts.  I concur on every point, and wish you
each and all
a peaceful, happy solstice/new year.

Bruce King

PS:  Rob Tom, if you try to escape this list, I will personally
come up there to the North Pole and hunt you down and trap
you and yank you back in.

You're either with us or you're with us, by jimmy.


- --- This list does not allow attachments or HTML mail.  ---
- ---The notes below outline what was removed. ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/enriched
- ---


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

Date: 15 Dec 2004 16:15:25 -0600
From: Bruce King ecobruce@...
Subject: Re: GSBN:Re: Proposal


On Dec 15, 2004, at 11:14 AM, billc_lists@...:

>  I suggest that unless we get some strong
> arguments from people who are familiar with Hank and feel that his
> inclusion in the list would be a positive thing overall, that we
> don't invite him to join GSBN at present.

Bill, I agree.

Bruce King, Mr. Agreeable



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

End of Digest

To request a copy of the help file, reply to this message and put "help" in
the subject.