Cohousing-L Mailing List: RE: use of email for communication

[Rob Sandelin (floriferous]

Kay makes an interesting point, that communication can be stifled in the
game of, EVERYBODY has to hear it. One of the things that happens is that
you will find your patterns of life will create distances between you and
other people who are in opposite patterns, so several weeks may pass before
you happen to cross paths with a particular person. Email is one way to help
connect you with those whose paths you don't regularily cross. There are a
couple people in my community who I might only see once every two months or
so. Email keep us connected, silly as it sounds.

At Sharingwood we retrofitted in a LAN, and the hub computer provides access
for several folks who desire it. Printouts are also avialable. We have had
some interesting threads on email because it is much easier to fire up email
than get a meeting scheduled sometimes.

Rob Sandelin
Northwest Intentional Communities Association
Building a better society, one neighborhood at a time

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cohousing-l [at] freedom2.mtn.org
> [mailto:cohousing-l [at] freedom2.mtn.org]On Behalf Of Kay Argyle
> Sent: Tuesday, February 29, 2000 7:44 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: Re: use of email for communication
>
>
> > adopt a policy ... that seems to
> > specifically prohibit [email's] use for discussions because some people
> don't
> > like it.
>
> Wasatch Commons has undergone a couple of attempts to cut off any
> discussions by email, with the arguments that people said rude things and
> people got excluded.  Neither of those held water for me.  Some of the
> nastiest things I've heard said in cohousing came from face-to-face
> meetings.  It became clear that the people in our group who didn't have
> email _chose_ not to, which to me turned the whole thing around -- it
> wasn't fair for people who chose not to participate to prevent others who
> wished to (if "not everyone is present" is a valid argument -- no more
> talking in the laundry room!).
>
> It seemed to me the discussions over email were a lot more
> substantive than
> discussions held during casual encounters.  Email discussion sometimes
> brought out objections in time for a proposal to be tweaked, instead of
> ambushing it at the community meeting.
>
> I frequently need to babble on about something for a while to figure out
> what I think.  I don't think fast, either.  (Lucky for you all, a lot of
> babbling gets deleted before I hit "send.")  There isn't time for that in
> meetings.  On one occasion, a proposal that I wrote got amended during the
> meeting in such a way that when I thought it through afterwards I
> felt sick
> about the repercussions and the precedent, and I wished whole-heartedly
> that I had blocked it (my own proposal, remember).  (Fortunately,
> circumstances prevented implementation.)
>
> The people who think fast and are verbal dominate meeting discussions.  I
> rarely say much in meetings, and I felt cutting off email discussion
> amounted to censorship.
>
> Kay
> Wasatch Commons, SLC
>