Hi again,

I echo Domenico's words.

(Just to clarify, en lo que a mí respecta, when I mentioned membership fees in a previous message I was asking if the 'independence' proposal would mean start charging fees as a different organisation -it has been clarified it will not. Maybe mistakenly I had assumed that as a ADHO SIG GO::DH was indirectly funded by ADHO's membership fees, or, to put it in a different but related way, that it was because we were members of ADHO that we had at least originally found out about GO::DH. I have also questioned the membership model of ADHO in the past, and therefore found it attractive that an autonomous group emerging from an ADHO SIG would not be based on the traditional membership fee business model).

Apologies for the intermission. Carry on...


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 16 October 2017 at 18:01, Domenico Fiormonte <domenico.fiormonte@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Alex and dear all:

as anyone on this list (and beyond this list) knows, I've been very critical of the ADHO model for the last six or seven years. I've made a number of proposals addressing institutional, cultural and linguistic issues (see in English: https://www.digitalstudies.org/articles/10.16995/dscn.274/), and in the next weeks I'll try to add my contributions to the "Leave" document.

So the first thing I'd like to say is that I support Alex and Roopika's move. What other friends and I had in mind as an istrument to overcome the ADHO's model was a Federative system, but, admittedly, this is not going to happen anytime soon. Alex and Roopika's proposals seem a good start insofar as it tries to return to a project-based community that goes beyond the classical model of accumulation of symbolic power (i.e. academic visibility, etc.).

Two of the weakest points of ADHO were (and are) in my opinion the lack of transparency and the an unequal representation system, mainly based on income. So I particularly liked this sentence: "guaranteed representation in the executive from agreed-upon, major regions of the planet."

While I second the "GO::DHexit", I would also like to add that at this point we need more information about the negotations between GO::DH and ADHO. In reading Alex and Roopika's document I couldn't help perceiving a sub-text of unspoken issues.
It also worries me when Barbara says she didn't know about ADHO asking GO::DH to pay membership fees, because if she didn't know, then who knows?

All the best

Domenico


_______________________________________________
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.