Writing as a habutual PHYS-L lurker, I'd like to thank John Denker for
his note about tone, a note which was typical of his lucid, direct style.
I mention that I am a lurker because on monday of this week I was
discussing a PHYS-L thread with one of my students and we both
acknowleged that it's a little intimidating to put your two cents into a
conversation when you can see others apparently browbeaten in the
course of disagreement.
As I suspect most of us were, I was trained in a physics building in
which practically every lounge, hallway and office included a
blackboard, and ideas were debated in a cloud of chalk dust.
Arguments became heated, but largely they happended in a context of
face-to-face collegiality. Email is a different medium - there is no
ancillary interpersonal data (body language, vocal pattern) to help
inform a reader about the details of the writer's true posture.
I have never met any members of this list face-to-face, though I'm sure
I would enjoy it very much, judging by the humor and level of erudition.
Still, I post very infrequently, partly because of how the tone of the list
can develop. If a co-worker snaps at me (or vice versa) there is the
opportunity to repair the relationship in the course of regular comings
and goings; the next time we debate a question we can do so in a
renewed atmosphere of mutual trust that embraces the possibility of
forthright disagreement which may at times be heated. Disembodied,
asynchronous electronic communication does not have the same
corrective mechanisms. In order to reassure someone that you don't
REALLY think they're an idiot you might have to write with great care
and attention; in person a simple smile the next time you pass in the
hall will often suffice.
This is where the issue of diversity becomes relevant. A person who
has reason to believe, based on personal history, there exist
situations in which they may not be taken seriously based on factors
exogenous to intelligence or training (such as but not limited to sex or
skin color), this person will surely think twice about entering into a
colloquy which they know might easily become, ahem, "impolite." If, in
the course of normal life, I have to deal with a certain amont of flack
just for being who I am, why should I enter into a culture that that
routinely deals out flack, leaving me to do the extra work of sorting the
"normal" flak from the stuff that I really don't deserve?
Well, I really meant to just write a quick three-line thanks to John, but I
guess I got carried away. Now I think I'll try to find that Physics Today
editorial someone mentioned....
David Strasburger
Noble & Greenough School
Dedham MA