Dear all,
I apologise for the length of this e-mail, but I write regarding a series of fairly fundamental changes to the DM infrastructure that we have been planning for some time now. Given the scale of these changes, we on the DM Board think it is important to explain these in some detail and request feedback from the Community before we go ahead with them. They will also require a change of the Byelaws, and so again we need input from the Community for this.
Unfortunately the existing infrastructure has proven unmanageable. The wiki and mailing-list have both been subject to large-scale spam attacks, such that the wiki now contains many many thousands of articles, only 70 or so of which are genuine. The wiki has also had almost no activity beyond that of the Board, and so it has not been doing the job that we had hoped. Furthermore the website itself, which we have been hosting and coding ourselves (with substantial help from James Cummings and Dan O’Donnell) is also proving increasingly difficult to manage: it depends on the generosity of James and Dan to host and administer, even adding new pages is not trivial, and it has needed a dramatic overhaul for some time but to do this requires much more time and effort than we have been able to manage. For all of these reasons, we propose the following:
1. Moving the static website from the existing infrastructure (Cocoon + TEI + custom XSLT) to a standard CMS (currently Wordpress). 2. Closing down the wiki entirely and replacing it with a blog. 3. For the moment we are leaving the Journal in place, but we are very likely to move it to a dedicated open journal hosting of some sort. We have been discussing this in some detail with Revues.org but are not yet committed to this.
As most of you have realised, we have already set up a Wordpress version of the site at http://digitalmedievalist.wordpress.com/, and this is already proving to overcome the problems listed above. The proposal is therefore to make this the DM site and close down the old one, except perhaps for the Journal.
However, the current Byelaws require that DM maintains a wiki (see http://digitalmedievalist.wordpress.com/about/byelaws/#wiki). The Board is therefore not free to close the existing wiki without first changing the Byelaws. Even if we chose to keep the wiki, however, the Board feels that the Byelaws should not lock us into using any single technology, and so they should be changed even if we keep the existing infrastructure. The details of the proposed changes to the Byelaws will be posted shortly as a separate e-mail and on the new website, but in essence we propose simply to replace the term 'wiki' with 'information resources' and to adapt the containing sentences accordingly.
We would be grateful for any feedback about any aspect of this, preferably by e-mail to the list for general discussion, or alternatively to board@digitalmedievalist.org or any members of the Board directly. The next Board meeting is 4pm GMT+1 on Monday 2 June, at which point any comments will be discussed, and any changes in the Byelaws will be presented to the membership for vote shortly after that (as specified in §9 of the Byelaws: http://digitalmedievalist.wordpress.com/about/byelaws/#amendments).
Thank you, and we look forward to receiving your comments.
Peter Stokes (on behalf of the Executive Board)
-- Dr Peter Stokes Senior Lecturer Department of Digital Humanities King's College London Room 218, 2nd Floor 26-29 Drury Lane London, WC2B 5RL Tel: +44 (0)20 7848 2813 peter.stokes@kcl.ac.uk
Dear Peter and members of the board,
Thank you very much for this very clear summary. The solutions you suggest seem to me perfectly sensible. The CMS + blog will certainly make the DM infrastructure more manageable, and a blog is probably better suited than a wiki to meet the needs of a community like ours. Regarding the journal, which I consider a cornerstone of DM, I also think that joining an academic open journal hosting platform would be a good move. Those days, there are more online academic journals than mushrooms in a dank grove... a good publishing platform will lend weight to the journal and possibly attract more authors and readers. It will also make tha technical adminisration lighter, hopefully, and this is an important feature in a community that relies only on the goodwill of its members.
Best wishes, Marjorie
----- Mail original -----
De: "Peter Stokes" peter.stokes@kcl.ac.uk À: dm-l@uleth.ca Envoyé: Mercredi 21 Mai 2014 14:05:01 Objet: [dm-l] Proposed Changes to DM
Dear all,
I apologise for the length of this e-mail, but I write regarding a series of fairly fundamental changes to the DM infrastructure that we have been planning for some time now. Given the scale of these changes, we on the DM Board think it is important to explain these in some detail and request feedback from the Community before we go ahead with them. They will also require a change of the Byelaws, and so again we need input from the Community for this.
Unfortunately the existing infrastructure has proven unmanageable. The wiki and mailing-list have both been subject to large-scale spam attacks, such that the wiki now contains many many thousands of articles, only 70 or so of which are genuine. The wiki has also had almost no activity beyond that of the Board, and so it has not been doing the job that we had hoped. Furthermore the website itself, which we have been hosting and coding ourselves (with substantial help from James Cummings and Dan O’Donnell) is also proving increasingly difficult to manage: it depends on the generosity of James and Dan to host and administer, even adding new pages is not trivial, and it has needed a dramatic overhaul for some time but to do this requires much more time and effort than we have been able to manage. For all of these reasons, we propose the following:
1. Moving the static website from the existing infrastructure (Cocoon + TEI + custom XSLT) to a standard CMS (currently Wordpress). 2. Closing down the wiki entirely and replacing it with a blog. 3. For the moment we are leaving the Journal in place, but we are very likely to move it to a dedicated open journal hosting of some sort. We have been discussing this in some detail with Revues.org but are not yet committed to this.
As most of you have realised, we have already set up a Wordpress version of the site at http://digitalmedievalist.wordpress.com/, and this is already proving to overcome the problems listed above. The proposal is therefore to make this the DM site and close down the old one, except perhaps for the Journal.
However, the current Byelaws require that DM maintains a wiki (see http://digitalmedievalist.wordpress.com/about/byelaws/#wiki). The Board is therefore not free to close the existing wiki without first changing the Byelaws. Even if we chose to keep the wiki, however, the Board feels that the Byelaws should not lock us into using any single technology, and so they should be changed even if we keep the existing infrastructure. The details of the proposed changes to the Byelaws will be posted shortly as a separate e-mail and on the new website, but in essence we propose simply to replace the term 'wiki' with 'information resources' and to adapt the containing sentences accordingly.
We would be grateful for any feedback about any aspect of this, preferably by e-mail to the list for general discussion, or alternatively to board@digitalmedievalist.org or any members of the Board directly. The next Board meeting is 4pm GMT+1 on Monday 2 June, at which point any comments will be discussed, and any changes in the Byelaws will be presented to the membership for vote shortly after that (as specified in §9 of the Byelaws: http://digitalmedievalist.wordpress.com/about/byelaws/#amendments).
Thank you, and we look forward to receiving your comments.
Peter Stokes (on behalf of the Executive Board)
Dear all, a brief answer: I surely agree with 1 (moving the main site to the Wordpress CMS) and have no big problems with 3 (eventually moving the Journal to an open journal system), but I'm a little perplexed by 2, i.e. closing the wiki altogether to replace it with a blog. Basically, if we didn't manage to gather enough attention to make it a shared and contributed-to resource, things wouldn't change much moving it to a different technical platform; while on the purely technical side a Wordpress site can end up as spam-infested as a wiki one.
Merging the DM wiki with the Digital Classicist one make sense to me, or making its editing login-based and try to revive it, otherwise perhaps we should consider about shutting it down IMHO.
All best,
R
Il 21/05/2014 14:05, Stokes, Peter ha scritto:
Dear all,
I apologise for the length of this e-mail, but I write regarding a series of fairly fundamental changes to the DM infrastructure that we have been planning for some time now. Given the scale of these changes, we on the DM Board think it is important to explain these in some detail and request feedback from the Community before we go ahead with them. They will also require a change of the Byelaws, and so again we need input from the Community for this.
Unfortunately the existing infrastructure has proven unmanageable. The wiki and mailing-list have both been subject to large-scale spam attacks, such that the wiki now contains many many thousands of articles, only 70 or so of which are genuine. The wiki has also had almost no activity beyond that of the Board, and so it has not been doing the job that we had hoped. Furthermore the website itself, which we have been hosting and coding ourselves (with substantial help from James Cummings and Dan O’Donnell) is also proving increasingly difficult to manage: it depends on the generosity of James and Dan to host and administer, even adding new pages is not trivial, and it has needed a dramatic overhaul for some time but to do this requires much more time and effort than we have been able to manage. For all of these reasons, we propose the following:
- Moving the static website from the existing infrastructure (Cocoon + TEI + custom XSLT) to a standard CMS (currently Wordpress).
- Closing down the wiki entirely and replacing it with a blog.
- For the moment we are leaving the Journal in place, but we are very likely to move it to a dedicated open journal hosting of some sort. We have been discussing this in some detail with Revues.org but are not yet committed to this.
As most of you have realised, we have already set up a Wordpress version of the site at http://digitalmedievalist.wordpress.com/, and this is already proving to overcome the problems listed above. The proposal is therefore to make this the DM site and close down the old one, except perhaps for the Journal.
However, the current Byelaws require that DM maintains a wiki (see http://digitalmedievalist.wordpress.com/about/byelaws/#wiki). The Board is therefore not free to close the existing wiki without first changing the Byelaws. Even if we chose to keep the wiki, however, the Board feels that the Byelaws should not lock us into using any single technology, and so they should be changed even if we keep the existing infrastructure. The details of the proposed changes to the Byelaws will be posted shortly as a separate e-mail and on the new website, but in essence we propose simply to replace the term 'wiki' with 'information resources' and to adapt the containing sentences accordingly.
We would be grateful for any feedback about any aspect of this, preferably by e-mail to the list for general discussion, or alternatively to board@digitalmedievalist.org or any members of the Board directly. The next Board meeting is 4pm GMT+1 on Monday 2 June, at which point any comments will be discussed, and any changes in the Byelaws will be presented to the membership for vote shortly after that (as specified in §9 of the Byelaws: http://digitalmedievalist.wordpress.com/about/byelaws/#amendments).
Thank you, and we look forward to receiving your comments.
Peter Stokes (on behalf of the Executive Board)
-- Dr Peter Stokes Senior Lecturer Department of Digital Humanities King's College London Room 218, 2nd Floor 26-29 Drury Lane London, WC2B 5RL Tel: +44 (0)20 7848 2813 peter.stokes@kcl.ac.uk
Digital Medievalist -- http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/ Journal: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/journal/ Journal Editors: editors _AT_ digitalmedievalist.org News: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/news/ Wiki: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/wiki/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/digitalmedieval Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=49320313760 Discussion list: dm-l@uleth.ca Change list options: http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/listinfo/dm-l
Hi everyone,
I think I'm going along with the majority of folks who have replied thus far: I think it's a good idea to move the main site to Wordpress, and I also think it's a good idea to move the journal to another system (I know we've been in talks with revues.org, we might also consider Indiana University Bloomington's set-up which uses Open Journal System, they publish The Medieval Review and many other journals as well, although I don't know if there is anyone at IUB who would be willing to act as contact for that). Off the shelf technology has improved vastly in the years since DM was founded, and there's no reason for us not to take advantage of that (rather than playing sysadmin and building code from scratch - which can be fun, but is time consuming)
I think it would be great to have some kind of place to serve the type of information that the wiki has traditionally served - definitions of terms, lists of projects and tools, that kind of thing. Something that isn't well served by a blog-type interface, or even a regular website organization. I agree with Gabby that actually merging DM into the Digital Classicist wiki is probably not the best approach, because (let's be honest), medieval studies isn't classics. We could do well to learn from them however - having a closed wiki would help with the spam, and focusing on new methods for getting data into the wiki (as DC is organizing wiki sprints). I wonder if there's another type of site, not a wiki, that could be used for the same purpose? I can't think of anything.
My $.02 fwiw
Dot
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Roberto Rosselli Del Turco < rosselli@ling.unipi.it> wrote:
Dear all, a brief answer: I surely agree with 1 (moving the main site to the Wordpress CMS) and have no big problems with 3 (eventually moving the Journal to an open journal system), but I'm a little perplexed by 2, i.e. closing the wiki altogether to replace it with a blog. Basically, if we didn't manage to gather enough attention to make it a shared and contributed-to resource, things wouldn't change much moving it to a different technical platform; while on the purely technical side a Wordpress site can end up as spam-infested as a wiki one.
Merging the DM wiki with the Digital Classicist one make sense to me, or making its editing login-based and try to revive it, otherwise perhaps we should consider about shutting it down IMHO.
All best,
R
Il 21/05/2014 14:05, Stokes, Peter ha scritto:
Dear all,
I apologise for the length of this e-mail, but I write regarding a series of fairly fundamental changes to the DM infrastructure that we have been planning for some time now. Given the scale of these changes, we on the DM Board think it is important to explain these in some detail and request feedback from the Community before we go ahead with them. They will also require a change of the Byelaws, and so again we need input from the Community for this.
Unfortunately the existing infrastructure has proven unmanageable. The wiki and mailing-list have both been subject to large-scale spam attacks, such that the wiki now contains many many thousands of articles, only 70 or so of which are genuine. The wiki has also had almost no activity beyond that of the Board, and so it has not been doing the job that we had hoped. Furthermore the website itself, which we have been hosting and coding ourselves (with substantial help from James Cummings and Dan O’Donnell) is also proving increasingly difficult to manage: it depends on the generosity of James and Dan to host and administer, even adding new pages is not trivial, and it has needed a dramatic overhaul for some time but to do this requires much more time and effort than we have been able to manage. For all of these reasons, we propose the following:
- Moving the static website from the existing infrastructure (Cocoon +
TEI + custom XSLT) to a standard CMS (currently Wordpress). 2. Closing down the wiki entirely and replacing it with a blog. 3. For the moment we are leaving the Journal in place, but we are very likely to move it to a dedicated open journal hosting of some sort. We have been discussing this in some detail with Revues.org but are not yet committed to this.
As most of you have realised, we have already set up a Wordpress version of the site at http://digitalmedievalist.wordpress.com/, and this is already proving to overcome the problems listed above. The proposal is therefore to make this the DM site and close down the old one, except perhaps for the Journal.
However, the current Byelaws require that DM maintains a wiki (see < http://digitalmedievalist.wordpress.com/about/byelaws/#wiki%3E). The Board is therefore not free to close the existing wiki without first changing the Byelaws. Even if we chose to keep the wiki, however, the Board feels that the Byelaws should not lock us into using any single technology, and so they should be changed even if we keep the existing infrastructure. The details of the proposed changes to the Byelaws will be posted shortly as a separate e-mail and on the new website, but in essence we propose simply to replace the term 'wiki' with 'information resources' and to adapt the containing sentences accordingly.
We would be grateful for any feedback about any aspect of this, preferably by e-mail to the list for general discussion, or alternatively to board@digitalmedievalist.org or any members of the Board directly. The next Board meeting is 4pm GMT+1 on Monday 2 June, at which point any comments will be discussed, and any changes in the Byelaws will be presented to the membership for vote shortly after that (as specified in §9 of the Byelaws: http://digitalmedievalist.wordpress.com/about/byelaws/# amendments).
Thank you, and we look forward to receiving your comments.
Peter Stokes (on behalf of the Executive Board)
-- Dr Peter Stokes Senior Lecturer Department of Digital Humanities King's College London Room 218, 2nd Floor 26-29 Drury Lane London, WC2B 5RL Tel: +44 (0)20 7848 2813 peter.stokes@kcl.ac.uk
Digital Medievalist -- http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/ Journal: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/journal/ Journal Editors: editors _AT_ digitalmedievalist.org News: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/news/ Wiki: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/wiki/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/digitalmedieval Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=49320313760 Discussion list: dm-l@uleth.ca Change list options: http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/listinfo/dm-l
--
Roberto Rosselli Del Turco roberto.rossellidelturco at unito.it Dipartimento di Studi rosselli at ling.unipi.it Umanistici Then spoke the thunder DA Universita' di Torino Datta: what have we given? (TSE)
Hige sceal the heardra, heorte the cenre, mod sceal the mare, the ure maegen litlath. (Maldon 312-3)
Digital Medievalist -- http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/ Journal: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/journal/ Journal Editors: editors _AT_ digitalmedievalist.org News: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/news/ Wiki: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/wiki/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/digitalmedieval Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=49320313760 Discussion list: dm-l@uleth.ca Change list options: http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/listinfo/dm-l
I think the only caveat that needs to be mentioned in all this is that the location of the journal is not a fully autonomous decision--or at least if it is, it potentially involves giving up as much as $7k+ a year in in-kind and cash funding.
Currently the journal is managed within the Lethbridge journal incubator. This is a start up Open Access publisher that provides about $7k in in-kind funding in the form of managing assistance plus some cash for odd jobs.
This has been by no means perfect--we had an assistant dean try to kill it this past year before she fully understood just how strongly her boss, the dean of the graduate school, stood behind it. The result was that she severely restricted our access to funds for several months until we were able to get her countermanded. And, frankly, we also had trouble finding the right balance in relations between the students we had been able to supply and the editorial board.
The first of these issues has now been cleared up: we've been promised four positions a year for the foreseeable future and the incubator is moving from a prototype to an official and centrally supported Centre within the University in the course of the next six months.
The second certainly improved somewhat during the past year, though that has been with me largely acting as the graduate student, since the previous student quit in the face of the pressure she was placed under (when a grad student turns down 7k, you know there is an issue).
All this, however, is by-the-by. The issue now is whether the contribution from us is worth continuing and, if it is, how our ability to deliver it is affected by the system DM moves to (unlike all other journals in the system DM doesn't contribute anything back to the incubator, except, I had originally hoped, some willingness to help train the students in it).
Another thing that I have suggested to the board is that there is a lot of hype around various platforms. While they can definitely be an improvement over DM's current handrolled site, they are often far less comprehensive than their developers claim. Stock OJS, for example, builds itself as a all-in-one solution, but it is actually a very heavy workflow manager and publication platform that doesn't necessarily support two essential aspects of DM's production: despite what many people seem to think, it does not support at all the word-processor-to-delivery-format conversion that lies at the heart of any journal (though a recent module apparently supports Word-to-NLM XML). It also needs to be hacked severly to support DM's model of rolling release with special clusters: stock OJS sees "issues" (i.e. clusters of papers) as a sequence and its automatic Table of Content generator doesn't allow two issues to be kept open at the same time (Digital Studies/Le champ Numérique, which takes a similar approach to issues as DM, but within OJS, has had to give up on the TOC generator entirely. Its front page is actually hand coded). A study by the Public Knowledge Partnership OJS's developer actually suggested, moreover, that the OJS workflow model may be better suited to larger journals than very small ones like DM.
I understand that the core of revues.org is based on a modified OJS install. I don't know if it now supports automatic word to XML conversion (it didn't when we initially set up the Journal of the TEI) nor do I know if it has addressed the structural issue about how OJS handles issues. But what we did learn in setting both J-TEI up in revues.org and DSCN in an inherited OJS install was that both systems over-promised and under-delivered on what was the bit of the production workflow that people found most technically challenging.
So research is absolutely required on this: I know of a couple of journals that switched to OJS because they thought it would address technical issues they were having, only to discover it solved everything but those technical issues. On the other hand, both systems are a vast improvement over the current in terms of improving discoverability.
Anyway, this is a long way of saying that, having been involved now with at least four journals and professionally engaged as a researcher and member of the administration of force11.org, I've come to the conclusion that changing any journal's delivery, production, and workflow management systes can prove to be a very complicated undertaking. I agree wholeheartedly that it is time to reexamine what DM is doing. But I also know that people regularly under-estimate and misunderstand what the issues are, that systems that support journals (including, I acknowledge this past year, the incubator) regularly over-promise what they can do, and that the implications of the decision can be quite significant from both a funding and a bibliographic perspective.
Having said all that, I will add that my one feelings about changing the journals are limited to a hope that the change is well-researched and fully understood, no matter what it is. If that means keeping the journal within our financing and management model, which is certainly compatible with OJS or home-rolled systems (the three journals we currently host use two completely different home-rolled systems and one OJS install), I'm all for it. If it means abandoning the current incubator model, I'm cool with that too. The important thing is that people realise the costs and benefits of whatever is proposed.
-dan
On 14-05-27 10:10 AM, Dot Porter wrote:
Hi everyone,
I think I'm going along with the majority of folks who have replied thus far: I think it's a good idea to move the main site to Wordpress, and I also think it's a good idea to move the journal to another system (I know we've been in talks with revues.org http://revues.org, we might also consider Indiana University Bloomington's set-up which uses Open Journal System, they publish The Medieval Review and many other journals as well, although I don't know if there is anyone at IUB who would be willing to act as contact for that). Off the shelf technology has improved vastly in the years since DM was founded, and there's no reason for us not to take advantage of that (rather than playing sysadmin and building code from scratch - which can be fun, but is time consuming)
I think it would be great to have some kind of place to serve the type of information that the wiki has traditionally served - definitions of terms, lists of projects and tools, that kind of thing. Something that isn't well served by a blog-type interface, or even a regular website organization. I agree with Gabby that actually merging DM into the Digital Classicist wiki is probably not the best approach, because (let's be honest), medieval studies isn't classics. We could do well to learn from them however - having a closed wiki would help with the spam, and focusing on new methods for getting data into the wiki (as DC is organizing wiki sprints). I wonder if there's another type of site, not a wiki, that could be used for the same purpose? I can't think of anything.
My $.02 fwiw
Dot
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Roberto Rosselli Del Turco <rosselli@ling.unipi.it mailto:rosselli@ling.unipi.it> wrote:
Dear all, a brief answer: I surely agree with 1 (moving the main site to the Wordpress CMS) and have no big problems with 3 (eventually moving the Journal to an open journal system), but I'm a little perplexed by 2, i.e. closing the wiki altogether to replace it with a blog. Basically, if we didn't manage to gather enough attention to make it a shared and contributed-to resource, things wouldn't change much moving it to a different technical platform; while on the purely technical side a Wordpress site can end up as spam-infested as a wiki one. Merging the DM wiki with the Digital Classicist one make sense to me, or making its editing login-based and try to revive it, otherwise perhaps we should consider about shutting it down IMHO. All best, R Il 21/05/2014 14:05, Stokes, Peter ha scritto: Dear all, I apologise for the length of this e-mail, but I write regarding a series of fairly fundamental changes to the DM infrastructure that we have been planning for some time now. Given the scale of these changes, we on the DM Board think it is important to explain these in some detail and request feedback from the Community before we go ahead with them. They will also require a change of the Byelaws, and so again we need input from the Community for this. Unfortunately the existing infrastructure has proven unmanageable. The wiki and mailing-list have both been subject to large-scale spam attacks, such that the wiki now contains many many thousands of articles, only 70 or so of which are genuine. The wiki has also had almost no activity beyond that of the Board, and so it has not been doing the job that we had hoped. Furthermore the website itself, which we have been hosting and coding ourselves (with substantial help from James Cummings and Dan O’Donnell) is also proving increasingly difficult to manage: it depends on the generosity of James and Dan to host and administer, even adding new pages is not trivial, and it has needed a dramatic overhaul for some time but to do this requires much more time and effort than we have been able to manage. For all of these reasons, we propose the following: 1. Moving the static website from the existing infrastructure (Cocoon + TEI + custom XSLT) to a standard CMS (currently Wordpress). 2. Closing down the wiki entirely and replacing it with a blog. 3. For the moment we are leaving the Journal in place, but we are very likely to move it to a dedicated open journal hosting of some sort. We have been discussing this in some detail with Revues.org but are not yet committed to this. As most of you have realised, we have already set up a Wordpress version of the site at <http://digitalmedievalist.wordpress.com/>, and this is already proving to overcome the problems listed above. The proposal is therefore to make this the DM site and close down the old one, except perhaps for the Journal. However, the current Byelaws require that DM maintains a wiki (see <http://digitalmedievalist.wordpress.com/about/byelaws/#wiki>). The Board is therefore not free to close the existing wiki without first changing the Byelaws. Even if we chose to keep the wiki, however, the Board feels that the Byelaws should not lock us into using any single technology, and so they should be changed even if we keep the existing infrastructure. The details of the proposed changes to the Byelaws will be posted shortly as a separate e-mail and on the new website, but in essence we propose simply to replace the term 'wiki' with 'information resources' and to adapt the containing sentences accordingly. We would be grateful for any feedback about any aspect of this, preferably by e-mail to the list for general discussion, or alternatively to board@digitalmedievalist.org <mailto:board@digitalmedievalist.org> or any members of the Board directly. The next Board meeting is 4pm GMT+1 on Monday 2 June, at which point any comments will be discussed, and any changes in the Byelaws will be presented to the membership for vote shortly after that (as specified in §9 of the Byelaws: <http://digitalmedievalist.wordpress.com/about/byelaws/#amendments>). Thank you, and we look forward to receiving your comments. Peter Stokes (on behalf of the Executive Board) -- Dr Peter Stokes Senior Lecturer Department of Digital Humanities King's College London Room 218, 2nd Floor 26-29 Drury Lane London, WC2B 5RL Tel: +44 (0)20 7848 2813 <tel:%2B44%20%280%2920%207848%202813> peter.stokes@kcl.ac.uk <mailto:peter.stokes@kcl.ac.uk> Digital Medievalist -- http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/ Journal: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/journal/ Journal Editors: editors _AT_ digitalmedievalist.org <http://digitalmedievalist.org> News: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/news/ Wiki: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/wiki/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/digitalmedieval Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=49320313760 Discussion list: dm-l@uleth.ca <mailto:dm-l@uleth.ca> Change list options: http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/listinfo/dm-l -- Roberto Rosselli Del Turco roberto.rossellidelturco at unito.it <http://unito.it> Dipartimento di Studi rosselli at ling.unipi.it <http://ling.unipi.it> Umanistici Then spoke the thunder DA Universita' di Torino Datta: what have we given? (TSE) Hige sceal the heardra, heorte the cenre, mod sceal the mare, the ure maegen litlath. (Maldon 312-3) Digital Medievalist -- http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/ Journal: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/journal/ Journal Editors: editors _AT_ digitalmedievalist.org <http://digitalmedievalist.org> News: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/news/ Wiki: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/wiki/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/digitalmedieval Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=49320313760 Discussion list: dm-l@uleth.ca <mailto:dm-l@uleth.ca> Change list options: http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/listinfo/dm-l-- *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* Dot Porter (MA, MSLS) Digital Medievalist, Digital Librarian Email: dot.porter@gmail.com mailto:dot.porter@gmail.com Personal blog: dotporterdigital.org http://dotporterdigital.org Medieval Electronic Scholarly Alliance: http://www.mesa-medieval.org MESA blog: http://mesamedieval.wordpress.com/ MESA on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MedievalElectronicScholarlyAlliance *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Digital Medievalist -- http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/ Journal: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/journal/ Journal Editors: editors _AT_ digitalmedievalist.org News: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/news/ Wiki: http://www.digitalmedievalist.org/wiki/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/digitalmedieval Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=49320313760 Discussion list: dm-l@uleth.ca Change list options: http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/listinfo/dm-l
-
Burghart Marjorie -
Daniel O'Donnell -
Dot Porter -
Roberto Rosselli Del Turco -
Stokes, Peter