Peter Jones wrote:
> And possibly, speeding consensus development yields proportional
> poverty of
> knowledge capture for storage for later viewing/auditing.
That sounds accurate. Whether or not that was the intended effect, I
don't know.
I'm inclined to doubt it.
I suspect that the idea was to render discourse more rational and
methodical.
It does that. But the lack of separation between the two kinds of
arguments,
and the information content they provide, would make it difficult to
distinguish
the "generally useful" knowledge the results from the discussions
(characteristics
of different sorts, for example) from the project-specific knowledge
(why we
chose the sort we did).
The ability to distinguish between those when attempting to mine the
knowledge
base for information relative to dissimilar projects, vs. attempting to
access it
for similar projects, or when simply trying to reconstruct "why did we
do that".
Given that separation, I suspect that it would be easier to recognize
information
that has long-term value and apply it in other areas.
Community email addresses:
Post message: unrev-II@onelist.com
Subscribe: unrev-II-subscribe@onelist.com
Unsubscribe: unrev-II-unsubscribe@onelist.com
List owner: unrev-II-owner@onelist.com
Shortcut URL to this page:
http://www.onelist.com/community/unrev-II
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu Nov 01 2001 - 11:11:09 PST