Dear ALL<

Many thanks for all the comments, contributions on the ongoing debate. I have refrained from joining the debate for some reasons. I needed time to reflect and understand the issues at stake.

I have a few thoughts I would like to share.

Let me start by thanking all our executive members(founding, former and serving) for their work and service to GO::DH and the global DH body(ies).  I  deeply respect the opinions of Alex and Roopsi as well the concerns of everyone that have shared one thought or another. I am aware that a few of us have some reservations concerning our place and position(future) within the global DH body(ADHO). While I share that concerns, I would suggest that we take some time off and reflect on some far-reaching implications of any decision we take, going forward.  

One, so far, to the best of my knowledge and relatively speaking, I believe if we have worked on more than a few societies, many of us would agree that  GO::DH  has not fared badly. We are not yet there but I believe it is work in progress.

Two, GO::DH should be seen as an infrastructure rather a project--something that exists to receive the ideas and identities of others rather than always pushing things. A platform, or a bridge that connects others to the world of DH.

Three, I believe therefore that being associated with ADHO would make us more accessible to new participants who are not well-connected.  Consider A grad student in Africa or  a scholar working on his or her own in eastern Europe or the Middle East is not going to discover our world if we go off in isolation. They will if we are the global part of ADHO.

Wouldn’t our isolationist proposal  reduce  the global nature and impact of the organisation? To my mind, GO::DH's success so far, in my view is a result of it being something that people see themselves in  rather than something that does something. It provides a safe space for people to engage with DH globally.  I think we should see how much we've accomplished rather than the way others(in other organisation) are treating us. If we turn  GO::DH  into a project rather an infrasturcture would it not reduce  its openness and effectiveness? 

Many of us here in the global south are now able to access and/or engage the global DH community through GO::DH.

Finally, I will just suggest  therefore that we should try and focus more on the vision and the ideals of GO::DH based on the philosophies of the founding fathers.  

Let’s  reflect more on the implications of any decision that will lead to a negative outcome for GO::DH and those in the far corners of the world looking up to GO::DH to shine the light through the labyrinth of emerging and fast-moving world of DH  debates and projects.

 I  advise that we step back a little, take a deep breath and reflect on the long-term implications of any decision we'll take vis-a-vis our relationship with the global DH communities. 

These are just my personal opinions and I will continue to respect the decision of the greater majority.

I thank you all for all your opinions and contributions and service.

With every good wish,

Tunde