Poll

Would you prefer the proposed gothic building to be built around religious or secular symbolism?

Religious symbolism
7 (29.2%)
Secular symbolism
17 (70.8%)

Total Members Voted: 24

Author Topic: SpARTans' Events  (Read 53034 times)

Offline PeterT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3891
    • View Profile
    • PeterT's homepage in WikiWorks
Re: SpARTans' Events
« Reply #150 on: April 25, 2008, 05:23:17 PM »
You aren't causing a catastrophic failure. You're failing catastrophically to fit in (that'd be Noel's fault, not yours - no offense intended to you, every offense intended to Noel.)

When you aren't being graded and aren't being forced (which you clearly are, given the template and rushed nature of some of them - typical of dull and tedious homework) to give reviews of ideas.

Whilst I would agree that the expectations on the SpARTans (love the new name by the way) have raised lots of interesting questions for us, and clearly do not fit with the schome ethos - that is exactly what we wanted to explore in this phase of the project - so is useful (if somewhat uncomfortable at times for all concerned).

What I think we need to remember at this point is that
a) We wanted to explore these tensions - so should be happy they have arisen cos that gives us a chance to play around with them and see what the limits are (so just like the discussion about the cathedral was challenging it was also educational - a useful learning experience for many of us I suspect)
b) We have a responsibility to work constructively with everyone we (OK - I) have invited to join the community - bearing in mind the real constraints within which they have to operate (whilst also sticking as closely as we can to the  ethos of schome)

If this was all easy we wouldn't have needed to have this phase of the project ...
« Last Edit: April 26, 2008, 06:58:00 AM by PeterT »

Offline Kathy Schomer

  • The Hawaiian Shirts
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 665
    • View Profile
    • My blog
Re: Noel's Team Events
« Reply #151 on: April 25, 2008, 05:33:20 PM »
No, you have a responsibility to try and convince us. We have no obligation to do anything.

Besides, if the only way you can call this phase a success is in that we discovered it failed, it clearly didn't work very well.

You may be able to tell that I'm not going to be happy as long as Noel is busy screwing things up.
Meep.

Offline Tsuyoshikentsu Schomer

  • SParkers
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 30
    • View Profile
Re: Noel's Team Events
« Reply #152 on: April 25, 2008, 05:36:50 PM »
I feel the need to mention that since Peter sort of runs the project, he can actually do whatever he wants.

Welcome to salutory neglect, Kathy. ;)

Offline Kathy Schomer

  • The Hawaiian Shirts
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 665
    • View Profile
    • My blog
Re: Noel's Team Events
« Reply #153 on: April 25, 2008, 05:43:17 PM »
He can do whatever he wants by invoking the clause in the terms of use that says so. However, he is supposed to discuss with the community. Something that rarely, if ever, actually happens (okay, it's happened once while I've been here.)

Salutory neglect is not a term I am familiar with, unless it is a typo of salutary neglect - which seems inappropriate here. The rules say we're self governing!
Meep.

Offline Tsuyoshikentsu Schomer

  • SParkers
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 30
    • View Profile
Re: Noel's Team Events
« Reply #154 on: April 25, 2008, 05:51:49 PM »
Salutory neglect is not a term I am familiar with, unless it is a typo of salutary neglect - which seems inappropriate here. The rules say we're self governing!

Typo it was.  Sorry.

And, uhm... Peter kind of makes the rules.

Offline Kathy Schomer

  • The Hawaiian Shirts
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 665
    • View Profile
    • My blog
Re: Noel's Team Events
« Reply #155 on: April 25, 2008, 05:56:20 PM »
He does. The current set of rules says the community makes the rules, unless he overrides. It vaguely reminds me of article 48.
Meep.

Offline Explo Schomer

  • SP Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2386
  • Nice, eh?
    • View Profile
Re: Noel's Team Events
« Reply #156 on: April 25, 2008, 06:14:00 PM »
Firstly, my apologies for not covering the points fully. For one thing I'm slightly iffish about arguing with the complete ruler of schome. :P

Quote from: PeterT
We had/have a ruin of a church like building on Schome Park (check out the ruins in the SE corner of Schome Park alpha) - along with a big tomb thingy (spot the academic in me coming out) - and a stain glass window (OK so it seemed to be linked to some minority religious cult that rather than a mainstream religion) - and nobody at any point seemed unduly upset by it.

The 'temple of Woop', as I think of it, is an utterly different matter to a specifically named cathedral. It implies religion, and is built in the same style as many religious buildings are, but is not associated to any religion, which is the compromise which myself and others suggested for the cathedral. It is obvious that the building is intended to be a fun addition, rather than associating with a specific religion, which contrasts with a building which would be named specifically for the religion it is intended to portray and with obvious characteristics of that particular religion. I have no objections to a building such as the 'temple of Woop', but rather object to religious symbolism being used as an obvious and fundamental part of the building.

Quote from: Peter
We have a church on the OU campus.

The church in the real life OU is, again, another matter. It is already built and, from your description, built well, and thus it would be horrific to campaign for its destruction. Here, two main points differ in that the building has not been built and it is far easier (ie, it is feasible) to have buildings inworld temporarily and then remove them, to keep the effort put into a building while deleting its inworld presence etc. If the only place I could go to an event was in the church, I would go (hence I'll be in church this Sunday), but I would far prefer to go elsewhere, and in SL it is possible to make a building which is as good as or better than a cathedral in terms of architecture, space, etc.


I do not deny that without our objections we would have a good cathedral. However, I believe that we would have a better gothic building if it were secular, and that it is entirely possible explained and given evidence for in my two posts on this page and in this post. Throughout the debate (from page 2, to be precise, which appears to be my first post on the topic) I have offered the compromise of a gothic building with at most subtle religious symbolism, and as you say, compromises were also offered for a building which would only be in world for a very short time, for one which would have a very remote location and so on.

As far as I know, no one objected to any of the two latter compromises, and in the links given above I have supported the first compromise, and yet apparently the constraints of time were the deciding issue and the compromises were not acted upon. The vote was part of this last, almost desperate, effort to find a solution, and was meant to clearly show opinion about the matter, hopefully showing that a secular gothic building would be successful, rather than making a decision on the matter (although I will admit there were political reasons behind my suggestion for a poll, confident as I was of a vindicating result). I too remain disappointed in the result, and yet I think it clear that we were actually 'able to find a solution to the 'cathedral' problem which mirrored this [the pop gun events]'.

My final point is that you have grabbed hold of the wrong end of the stick in using the word 'offended'-it is extremely misleading. I do not think anyone has raised an objection against the building on the grounds of being offended, but rather through a belief that a cathedral would be damaging or due to a personal preference for secular buildings.

Sorry for the length of the post.
'I am the gadfly'-or at least, I'd like to be

Question everything, including this.

Offline Tsuyoshikentsu Schomer

  • SParkers
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 30
    • View Profile
Re: Noel's Team Events
« Reply #157 on: April 25, 2008, 06:22:52 PM »
Skimming because I'm between classes, but:

My final point is that you have grabbed hold of the wrong end of the stick in using the word 'offended'-it is extremely misleading. I do not think anyone has raised an objection against the building on the grounds of being offended, but rather through a belief that a cathedral would be damaging or due to a personal preference for secular buildings.

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what you said after I gave the example of the illuminated window with a saint.

Quote
Sorry for the length of the post.

You might want to just put that in your sig.

Offline Explo Schomer

  • SP Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2386
  • Nice, eh?
    • View Profile
Re: Noel's Team Events
« Reply #158 on: April 25, 2008, 06:31:19 PM »
Quote from: Tsuyoshikentsu
I'm pretty sure that's exactly what you said after I gave the example of the illuminated window with a saint.

I quote myself:
My artistic appreciation of buildings can be sorely damaged by the associations which they hold. I find it almost impossible to separate the beauty of the stained glass window from the distaste I feel at the religious scenes portrayed, and likewise I find wonderful music spoiled when a hymn is sung upon it.

I'm pretty adamant about saying what I mean when using text. In speech I'm useless at it. ;)

Quote from: Tsuyoshikentsu
You might want to just put that in your sig.

Not all of my posts are long, only about 4 in 5. :P It's a good point, although I think I'll keep typing it out each time-it feels more sincere to me that way.
'I am the gadfly'-or at least, I'd like to be

Question everything, including this.

Offline PeterT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3891
    • View Profile
    • PeterT's homepage in WikiWorks
Re: SpARTans' Events
« Reply #159 on: April 26, 2008, 06:33:41 AM »
Firstly, my apologies for not covering the points fully. For one thing I'm slightly iffish about arguing with the complete ruler of schome. :P

...

The day folk stop arguing with me is the day I should give up being the benign dictator ... so go for it (as I'm pleased to see you did  8) ).

I don't disagree with anything Explo said in his response to my posts - as always very clear, rationale and reasonable ...  :)
« Last Edit: April 26, 2008, 06:57:33 AM by PeterT »

Offline PeterT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3891
    • View Profile
    • PeterT's homepage in WikiWorks
Re: SpARTans' Events
« Reply #160 on: April 26, 2008, 06:54:06 AM »
I feel the need to mention that since Peter sort of runs the project, he can actually do whatever he wants.
...
If only it were that easy!   >:D

...
And, uhm... Peter kind of makes the rules.
He does. The current set of rules says the community makes the rules, unless he overrides. It vaguely reminds me of article 48.

At the end of the day of course I do have the power to impose pretty much any rules I fancy (within the constraints set by the OU ethics committee, our funders, Linden Lab, etc.. - but everybody has* the choice about whether to stay involved or vote with their feet and that is a powerful influence on how I choose to use my power. Of course that is how I have chosen to set this up in the first place - hence the benign in benign dictator?

Ultimately for me this is about trust - and a belief that I have that people (all people) are actually interested in learning (if the conditions are right - and for me that is primarily about ownership (responsibility and control), knowing about possibilities, and being valued).

PeterT

* This is an important element of being schomey - and something that is clearly problematic where a group of students are in here as part of their formal school activity, cos they then don't have the same levels of choice, their power is effectively reduced ... 



« Last Edit: April 26, 2008, 06:57:15 AM by PeterT »

Offline Explo Schomer

  • SP Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2386
  • Nice, eh?
    • View Profile
Re: SpARTans' Events
« Reply #161 on: April 26, 2008, 05:02:15 PM »
I don't disagree with anything Explo said in his response to my posts - as always very clear, rationale and reasonable ...  :)

I'm not sure I'm all that rational, certainly not as much as I'd like to be. I can't think of anything to say apart from 'thank you', so thank you. :)
'I am the gadfly'-or at least, I'd like to be

Question everything, including this.

Offline Noel SParker

  • SP team
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: SpARTans' Events
« Reply #162 on: May 01, 2008, 03:39:00 AM »
I want to express my thanks to Peter and others for their help in giving specific suggestions to orient and educate the spARTans. The use of “Noel’s Team” was intended to be an organizational tool to help find strands on the forum, not to define a power relationship; however, I understand the concern and have acted to remedy the situation.
When we were accepted into Schome, it was with full knowledge that Schome would facilitate learning inside of the regular school day. It was with full knowledge that we are in a public school with constraints including standards and requirements for accountability. 
I feel that it is very unfair to place blame, vilify, and condemn me for doing what is necessary for my job.  I have invested much time and effort into Schome because I believe it provides an exceptional learning experience.  I have tried to understand and done my best to encourage constructivism, self-directed learning, and choice.  I am always willing to learn and try to find ways to fit in.  My students who are unaccustomed to constructivist activities much less Schome, are learning too.  I sincerely hope that we will find these “ways to fit in” so that we may all be partners in learning.
Peter is correct is that students enrolled during a regular school do not have as much choice as others.  However, my students do choose their projects and partners (though all are welcome to join any project).  Also, they do not have to choose Schome at all; there are other learning activities available.
To me, it is important to note that we are all intensely engaged in incredibly powerful learning. Watching the problem solving, imagination, creativity, joy, teamwork, and pride is truly rewarding.  I feel this is success.


Offline PeterT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3891
    • View Profile
    • PeterT's homepage in WikiWorks
Re: SpARTans' Events
« Reply #163 on: May 01, 2008, 06:16:12 AM »
...
I feel that it is very unfair to place blame, vilify, and condemn me for doing what is necessary for my job.  I have invested much time and effort into Schome because I believe it provides an exceptional learning experience.  I have tried to understand and done my best to encourage constructivism, self-directed learning, and choice.  I am always willing to learn and try to find ways to fit in.  My students who are unaccustomed to constructivist activities much less Schome, are learning too.  I sincerely hope that we will find these “ways to fit in” so that we may all be partners in learning.
Peter is correct is that students enrolled during a regular school do not have as much choice as others.  However, my students do choose their projects and partners (though all are welcome to join any project).  Also, they do not have to choose Schome at all; there are other learning activities available.
To me, it is important to note that we are all intensely engaged in incredibly powerful learning. Watching the problem solving, imagination, creativity, joy, teamwork, and pride is truly rewarding.  I feel this is success.

Thanks for explaining your context a bit more - the fact that students have a choice between Schome and other things is something I wasn't aware of and is pretty schomey.

I totally agree about the fact that we knew that you would be including work in Schome Park during school time - and as I have said elsewhere this phase of the project deliberately set out to explore the interface/co-existence of schomey ideals and school.

Also agree that it is unfair to vilify you (or anyone else) - we are all constrained by our contexts. Let's face it, closing down Schome Park at the end of May won't exactly be the most schomey or benign thing I have ever done but given the context I find myself in I don't feel I have any other options.

So I will continue to raise challenges re the school-schome interface where that looks productive - whilst at the same time attempting to support you and your students in working on their projects.

I am finding it a useful learning experience too.  :)

PeterT