Revisit number forty two hundred

[Barb Weismann]

Nan:
It's not clear to me what your gripe is.  I originated this "thread."  I
sent it to a bunch of lists because it was a petition.  I think that
responders failed to delete all those lists from their replies.  However,
I guess I considered the discussion important enough to get to all working
volunteers. I think this should answer the part of the question about why
so many lists.

You next ask, I think, why get personal.  Well, Kenneth asked for
examples.  He wanted actual case histories of what was wrong.  I replied
to him with an example.  Terry replied with her example. 

Your question made me think of how we treat email addresses and titles,
though.  Basically, I don't really know who receives mail at xx029, xx031,
and other email addresses associated with positions.  When I write to
them, it's not to a person, it's like a call in the dark, anyone
home??  that's what it feels like.  I want someone on that desk in on what
the discussion is, but I won't necessarily focus in on a decision that "I
want Mel and Steve, or whomever, to read this."  When I do, I use their
personal account addresses. 

 Unfortunately, I also don't much associate the titles with the people,
either...I may write volunteer coordinaotr, IP coordinator, this is one
place where I am not really talking about Joel, Mel or Steve: I am talking
about the position, and how they might seem to fill it.  This is a
dissociation that is perhaps not nice to make, but I make it, and I think
others make it.  Why is because the needs of the organization have always
so far exceeded the capacity of the one person filling a post like
volunteer coordinator, that we have gotten used to talking about the post,
so as not to insult Nancy K. or Joel, who we know are doing what they can. 
I know this is a very odd twitch, but often we have done that trying to
keep some respect for the person while wishing the job could be expanded
and better done. 

I think others will concur that this is how long time scners feel.  And, I
think that dissociation from the reality of some other human out there is
clearly part of what email communication is about.  There are many names
here I have never met in person, and, goodness, they don't know what I
look like either!  I in no way support the dissociation, but it happens.

Barb



On Mon, 28 Jun 1999, Nan Hawthorne wrote:

> I have to ask this:
> 
> Is it really productive to criticize the work of individual volunteers on all
> these lists?  Would any of you who have singled out individual volunteers for
> public criticism feel very good about the same being done about you?
> 
> I'm embarrassed to read some of this.   And discouraged to see it.  There are
> assertive and cooperative ways to solve problems.
> 
> What if instead of going after folks in a public arena we discuss _appropriate_
> ways to resolve problems in an all-volunteer organization?  We might start by
> listing what we'd each hope others did when concerned that we are not doing
> _our_ part right.
> 
> I suggest we all follow Rod's example and provide clear, succinct and civil and
> un-personalized responses and questions.
> 
> Nan Hawthorne
> Co-coordinator, Human Resources
> 
> 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *  From the Listowner  * * * * * * * * * * * *
.	To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to:
majordomo at scn.org		In the body of the message, type:
unsubscribe scn
==== Messages posted on this list are also available on the web at: ====
* * * * * * *     http://www.scn.org/volunteers/scn-l/     * * * * * * *