As far as I'm aware, we just broached the idea and people went away thinking about it. The route to CO-hood, if that's something, is via direct discussion and timelines. There's an admissions committee that discusses how it might make sense and how a group might fit in--every group is special in some way. And then after the agreement is made, it joins. At least that's my understanding.
In my experience, it is really quite a pleasant thing. It provides an opportunity to think through who and what you are with a group that on the whole in my experience are eager to adapt to new groups.
In our case, we haven't really done anything beyond wondering if it was possible, because nobody has really been authorised to do any more. That's why my own personal opinion is that it is premature to say it wouldn't work for us. I don't think we've really investigated and what informal discussions we've had have been very constructive and flexible.
I think that's the only thing where I'd differ with some things that have been said. In my experience, ADHO and especially the admissions committee is one of the more flexible organisations I've dealt with. Every organisation that joins it has had a custom agreement in some way (and as I said, they created the category of SIG for us when we asked). And its internal structure and organisation has repeatedly turned around and inside on itself in response to these changes. It was one thing when it was only ALLC and ACH; then it was something else when it was only ALLC, ACH, and SDH-SEMI (the Canadians), the something else again when GO::DH joined as a SIG and CentreNet as a CO, and then so on right through to Humanistica today.
There's a lot to be said for both views I think. And my experience is not necessarily the same as others (and there have been some real issues in the past year or so, though I think there was a great rush to try and address them). But my experience nevertheless has been that the choice is not between an inflexible monolithic "other" and ourselves; it is really just a question of whether we want to see if joining ADHO as a CO parallel to the ACH, EADH, CSDH-SCHN, and so on is worthwhile (before decide yea or nay) or whether we are sure enough of what we are to say that no possible arrangement would be as good as minimal independence.
Daniel Paul O'Donnell
Professor of English and Associate Member of the University Library Academic Staff
Editor, Digital Studies/Le champ numérique
Vice President, Force 11
Department of English and University Library
University of Lethbridge
4401 University Drive West
Lethbridge AB T1K 3M4
Canada
Tel. +1 (403) 329-2377
http://people.uleth.ca/~daniel.odonnell
@danielPaulOD
From: globaloutlookdh-l <globaloutlookdh-l-bounces@uleth.ca> on behalf of Alex Gil <colibri.alex@gmail.com>
Sent: October 17, 2017 5:59
To: globaloutlookdh-l, MailList
Subject: Re: [globaloutlookDH-l] Why we should leave ADHO, go minimal and return to the planet.
Sent: October 17, 2017 5:59
To: globaloutlookdh-l, MailList
Subject: Re: [globaloutlookDH-l] Why we should leave ADHO, go minimal and return to the planet.
Hi Ernesto,
Just a quick note to say, that despite Harold's message saying that I have been a part of the conversations to become a CO, I have not been directly involved in any of the conversations, though I've had many pleasant conversations with Harold about other
matter. I never had a chance to talk to Harold in Montreal either. We never tried. Hi, Harold! The people are Dan, Élika, Roopika (I think, but not sure). Mostly Dan and Élika I think, but again, I'm not sure. This is not a flaw, it's just that I wasn't chair
last year, and have always been busier doing other work for our community, with an intense focus on its projects.
I too, would like to learn more where we are with that, and I would like to know where ADHO is with that. Dan? Harold?
a.
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 3:45 AM, Ernesto Priego
<efpriego@gmail.com> wrote:
PS Also, I have to say I have not paid fees because I have not attended the conference since 2014 (yikes!) - I suppose that makes me a member who is not 'in good standing.' Should I have had to pay a fee before being able to participate in this group? Will I have to pay a fee to earn my right to be polled on the future of a group I have participated in since its inception? It's not a rhetorical question. I hope it helps illustrating the different meanings of being an active 'member' of a group, and the hidden costs that stop many people from participating actively in academia.
I'll shut up now. Carry on... ;)
On 17 Oct 2017 08:25, "Ernesto Priego" <efpriego@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
I have read the contributions with interest. I have to confess I am a bit confused; maybe I'm not the only one?
It is apparent that members of the Executive know more about the genealogy of the 'independent' proposal and the ADHO changes and potential change to CO than other members of this list. Or maybe just me.
(Questions about this at the end of my message; a personal note before that).
Personally I like the 'independent' proposal, as a document, because it seeks to address the pitfalls we faced in the group creatively and in a way which is fit for purpose.
As I have expressed in the past a more formal arrangement tends to exclude many of us for different reasons. When I attempted being active in ADHO ad hoc committees, lack of funding, travel times, time zone differences and technological challenges put me at a disadvantage. Not all of us can take more than a week off in one go to attend pre-comference meetings and conference events abroad (often in places as expensive as Lausanne).
I have found myself mostly isolated in my criticism of the ADHO's deal with OUP for a paywalled journal that we through our universities have to then pay doubly -or is it triply?- so that we, our colleagues and students can access the work we produce. I would find it terribly depressing (if not antithetical) if GO::DH became a traditional 'CO' where only those with more relatively privileged conditions can have influence, and where members' fees would contribute to the ongoing paywalling and monopolisation of academic knowledge. This is why a 'minimal effort; big impact' would suit us better, in my opinion.
Now, re what I still find unclear...
Would it be possible for Alex and Roopika, and Harold and Dan, to share with the rest of us this 'geneaology'? What I find missing in the 'independent' proposal is the background, the explicit _why_ of the proposed change.
What I find missing or unclear in Harold's and Dan's is what the practical and financial implications would be, _who_ would receive money and how much and what for, and if GO::DH members would have to pay ADHO fees _and_ GO::DH fees.
Answers to these questions might help the rest of us understand the background as well as the potential future consequences. For example, if there is no consensus, who gets to _be_ GO::DH?
[Excuse typos and relative brevity. Touchtyped from my phone on my way to work]
All the best,
Ernesto
On 17 Oct 2017 03:08, "Alex Gil" <colibri.alex@gmail.com> wrote:
Thank you, Barbara. I wish nothing more than that.
In the spirit of democracy, I ask all current executive members to say they agree for this vote to take place on the membership. A simple majority is all we need. We do not need for the vote to take place in secret—nothing on the bylaws about that. The bylaws, on the other hand do encourage important issues to be polled by members:
"Individual members in good standing have the right to vote in GO::DH elections and such issues as the Executive shall decide to poll the membership on."
Just say aye if you agree.
If the executive approves the passing of the poll, we will stick to our schedule, and vote on December 15. This gives us time to deliberate and secure a proper referendum, with an electoral officer assuring the standards of the proceedings.
a.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:02 PM, B. Bordalejo <barbara.bordalejo@arts.kuleuven.be > wrote:
Dear Alex,
Thank you for putting my name forward. Of course, as always, I am willing to work with Dan and others in making this case. However, I would like to be assured that that the decision will not be only in the hands of the executive, but the whole of the GO::DH membership. After all, this is precisely what you have been proposing, right?
Best,
BB
On 16/10/2017 17:48, Alex Gil wrote:
Thank you all,
Real quick, so I don't interrupt your conversation too much. Dan, would you be amenable to making your argument into a Google Doc? Perhaps Glen and Barbara would like to add. Just so that we can keep organized.
That's all,Please continue. This will be enormously helpful for the executive committee when it comes time to make a decision. As always feel free to write in the language you are comfortable in. We will figure it out.
a.
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 7:17 PM, Amy Earhart <aearhart@tamu.edu> wrote:
Hello all,
It seems a large part of this discussion is not about ADHO, but rather about if we think our goals are best accomplished in an organizational structure. In some ways putting GO::DH into a large organization like ADHO is a poor fit. GO::DH started as a very grass roots organization that resisted hierarchies, committees, officers, etc. and rather used social media and loose collaborations to create some sort of a movement or to create small projects. To me we are much more like a social movement, a political movement, than we are a typical academic organization. I think we are at a moment where we need to figure out if such a beginning should be contained within an organization for positive benefits, reject such organizational structures as antithetical to our goals or to come up with some sort of a hybrid model. Thinking about the issue as less about ADHO and more in this structural way has helped me to consider what might be at stake and where we might go.
Best,
Amy
Amy E. EarhartAssociate Professor of EnglishTexas A&M University
______________________________
From: globaloutlookdh-l <globaloutlookdh-l-bounces@uleth.ca > on behalf of Roopika Risam <rrisam@gmail.com>
Sent: October 16, 2017 4:16
To: globaloutlookdh-l, MailList
Subject: Re: [globaloutlookDH-l] Why we should leave ADHO, go minimal and return to the planet.Ernesto,
I know I'm not Alex but the list belongs to the members, so I would argue that the conversation should happen however the members will it.
Roopika
--Roopika Risam, PhDAssistant Professor of EnglishChair, Program Area for Content EducationSalem State UniversityErnestoThank you for this, Alex.Thank you!
We should have a collective deadline of December 1 for deliberations. In that time, we encourage general and executive members to debate on the list what you would like to see GO::DH become. All of your discussion, comments, will be taken into consideration as the executive votes on a final decision by December 15.Should we have that conversation on this thread (i.e. in reply to your message as I am doing now) or would you prefer to have a different thread or even different threads?
Dr Ernesto Priego
@ernestopriego
https://epriego.wordpress.com/
http://www.comicsgrid.com/
Subscribe to the Comics Grid Newsletter: http://eepurl.com/iOYAj
The information contained in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this e-mail.
The contents of this e-mail must not be forwarded, disclosed or copied without the sender's consent. The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of any related organisations, projects, colleagues or employers.
On 15 October 2017 at 20:50, Alex Gil <colibri.alex@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear all,
As promised, here is the document with the argument for why we should leave ADHO. The first round was written by Dr. Roopika Risam and me, but those in support can add their own rationales and arguments, or comment on ours. Instructions are in the Google Doc.
A second argument will be prepared by those who support the idea of becoming a Constituent Organization of ADHO. I think Dan O'Donnell (Canada), Barbara Bordalejo (Argentina) and Glen Worthey (USA) have signaled they would be interested in drafting such a document. Hopefully sooner, rather than later, so we can proceed with deliberations.
After the second argument is made, a third argument is possible if enough members feel there should be a middle path, or a "third way."
We should have a collective deadline of December 1 for deliberations. In that time, we encourage general and executive members to debate on the list what you would like to see GO::DH become. All of your discussion, comments, will be taken into consideration as the executive votes on a final decision by December 15.
We will announce the results of the process before the year ends, and hopefully move forward with renewed energy into the next stage of GO::DH. Next year, I will pass on the baton to a new chair who will carry out our collective will, but will help in the transition, whatever that is, as long as I'm chair.
All best,Alex.
_______________________________________________
globaloutlookdh-l mailing list
globaloutlookdh-l@uleth.ca
http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/listinfo/globaloutlookdh-l
You are currently subscribed to this list in NON-digest mode. This means you receive every message as it is posted.
If this represents too much traffic, you can also subscribe in DIGEST mode. This sends out a single email once a day containing the entire day's postings. To change your settings go to http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/options/globaloutlookdh- You can request a password reminder from this page if you have forgotten yours.l
If this represents too much traffic, you can also subscribe in DIGEST mode. This sends out a single email once a day containing the entire day's postings. To change your settings go tohttp://listserv.uleth.ca/mai_______________________________________________
globaloutlookdh-l mailing list
globaloutlookdh-l@uleth.ca
http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/listinfo/globaloutlookdh-l
You are currently subscribed to this list in NON-digest mode. This means you receive every message as it is posted.
lman/options/globaloutlookdh-l You can request a password reminder from this page if you have forgotten yours.
_________________
globaloutlookdh-l mailing list
globaloutlookdh-l@uleth.ca
http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/listinfo/globaloutlookdh-l
You are currently subscribed to this list in NON-digest mode. This means you receive every message as it is posted.
If this represents too much traffic, you can also subscribe in DIGEST mode. This sends out a single email once a day containing the entire day's postings. To change your settings go to http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/options/globaloutlookdh- You can request a password reminder from this page if you have forgotten yours.l
_______________________________________________
globaloutlookdh-l mailing list
globaloutlookdh-l@uleth.ca
http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/listinfo/globaloutlookdh-l
You are currently subscribed to this list in NON-digest mode. This means you receive every message as it is posted.
If this represents too much traffic, you can also subscribe in DIGEST mode. This sends out a single email once a day containing the entire day's postings. To change your settings go to http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/options/globaloutlookdh-l You can request a password reminder from this page if you have forgotten yours.
_______________________________________________ globaloutlookdh-l mailing list globaloutlookdh-l@uleth.ca http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailm an/listinfo/globaloutlookdh-l You are currently subscribed to this list in NON-digest mode. This means you receive every message as it is posted. If this represents too much traffic, you can also subscribe in DIGEST mode. This sends out a single email once a day containing the entire day's postings. To change your settings go to http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/options/globaloutlookdh-l You can request a password reminder from this page if you have forgotten yours.
_______________________________________________
globaloutlookdh-l mailing list
globaloutlookdh-l@uleth.ca
http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/listinfo/globaloutlookdh-l
You are currently subscribed to this list in NON-digest mode. This means you receive every message as it is posted.
If this represents too much traffic, you can also subscribe in DIGEST mode. This sends out a single email once a day containing the entire day's postings. To change your settings go to http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/options/globaloutlookdh-l You can request a password reminder from this page if you have forgotten yours.
_______________________________________________
globaloutlookdh-l mailing list
globaloutlookdh-l@uleth.ca
http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/listinfo/globaloutlookdh-l
You are currently subscribed to this list in NON-digest mode. This means you receive every message as it is posted.
If this represents too much traffic, you can also subscribe in DIGEST mode. This sends out a single email once a day containing the entire day's postings. To change your settings go to http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/options/globaloutlookdh-l You can request a password reminder from this page if you have forgotten yours.
_______________________________________________
globaloutlookdh-l mailing list
globaloutlookdh-l@uleth.ca
http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/listinfo/ globaloutlookdh-l
You are currently subscribed to this list in NON-digest mode. This means you receive every message as it is posted.
If this represents too much traffic, you can also subscribe in DIGEST mode. This sends out a single email once a day containing the entire day's postings. To change your settings go to http://listserv.uleth.ca/mailman/options/ You can request a password reminder from this page if you have forgotten yours.globaloutlookdh-l