Andrew Feenberg and I work on Marginalia, which is a reincarnation of an earlier open source online discussion software called TextWeaver (http://www.textweaver.org) we developed.
Derek mentioned Marginalia and the use of tags. It is true that annotation is not really a tagging function. We have always wanted to implement the tagging function, which we call it keywording, and it is still in the plan for Marginalia. I can see why Derek sees the smart copy feature and annotation are two drastically different functions, but in fact, they are connected. Both are meant to facilitate the writing of weaving messages in a discussion forum. Both features are derived from TextWeaver.
We are in the process of upgrading Marginalia. Some major bugs were fixed. It should be faster. There will be an online help linked right next to the annotation button. With these improvements, we are hoping more people will use the tool and find it useful.
As always, it's wonderful to hear from people giving us feedback on the tool. It is much appreciated.
Cindy
Cindy Xin
Posts made by Cindy Xin
Hi Everyone,
This seminar is scheduled to end as of last Sunday. However, I see interesting conversation is still going on. There is no reason to stop. We started an open ended question about advancing and supporting online dialogue. We can in fact carry it on here indefinitely. Through the course of the last three weeks, we have engaged in some rather deep conversations about the nature of the dialogue, role of leadership in dialogue, its relationship to control and to open space, the function of acknowledgment/recognition/validation in successful dialogue, the meaning of lurking/listening/peripheral participation, levels of participation and motivation, the different contexts of dialogue (social vs. educational), and finally conversation through blog.
Now I wonder how you draw an end to a conversation like this. In an open space, the conversation is over when it's over. I like this approach. Also I believe a good conversation takes on a second life even when it is over. It may morph into a different conversation; it may create new relationship between the participants; it may lead to inspiration and actions... Whatever this second life might be, I hope there is one.
And in case you ever wonder what we talked about for three weeks, we have a wiki that holds the germs coming out of this conversation.
Thank you all. Keep in touch and I hope we will meet again down the road online or offline.
Cindy
This seminar is scheduled to end as of last Sunday. However, I see interesting conversation is still going on. There is no reason to stop. We started an open ended question about advancing and supporting online dialogue. We can in fact carry it on here indefinitely. Through the course of the last three weeks, we have engaged in some rather deep conversations about the nature of the dialogue, role of leadership in dialogue, its relationship to control and to open space, the function of acknowledgment/recognition/validation in successful dialogue, the meaning of lurking/listening/peripheral participation, levels of participation and motivation, the different contexts of dialogue (social vs. educational), and finally conversation through blog.
Now I wonder how you draw an end to a conversation like this. In an open space, the conversation is over when it's over. I like this approach. Also I believe a good conversation takes on a second life even when it is over. It may morph into a different conversation; it may create new relationship between the participants; it may lead to inspiration and actions... Whatever this second life might be, I hope there is one.
And in case you ever wonder what we talked about for three weeks, we have a wiki that holds the germs coming out of this conversation.
Thank you all. Keep in touch and I hope we will meet again down the road online or offline.
Cindy
Thanks Emma for comparing the sorting capabilities between Moodle and WebCT. This is useful to know.
Cindy
Cindy
Hello Bon,
Wonderful to see your posting. I hope you do feel safe to participate in this conversation space. I agree with you and believe feeling safe to speak up is a precondition for successful dialogue. Many people feel uneasy to speak, and often choose not to when facing audience in a physical space. Ironically online, the lack of physical presence of audience brings even additional communication anxiety. Providing a welcoming opening remark, modeling of communication behavior, gentle prompt, timely recognition, these are all things can be done to bring people into a conversation.
Cindy
Wonderful to see your posting. I hope you do feel safe to participate in this conversation space. I agree with you and believe feeling safe to speak up is a precondition for successful dialogue. Many people feel uneasy to speak, and often choose not to when facing audience in a physical space. Ironically online, the lack of physical presence of audience brings even additional communication anxiety. Providing a welcoming opening remark, modeling of communication behavior, gentle prompt, timely recognition, these are all things can be done to bring people into a conversation.
Cindy
I'd like to comment on one of the points Brenda brought up in one of her postings -
Brenda's comment describes perfectly the linear and cyclical nature of online dialogue. On the one hand, we carry on a conversation that flows linearly along time. We can perfectly sequence all the postings from the earliest to the latest based on the time stamps assigned to each. This is the explicit production that gets recorded. On the other hand, because of archiving, we are able to go back and revisit the old postings over and over again. We ruminate and reflect on what's been said. This implicit and cyclical thought process gives us the insights and understanding, which in turn produces the postings. There is a dialectical play between the linear production of the postings and cyclical process of the reflection.
"...my experience (or perhaps it is my Myers-Briggs) leads me to see the archiving as one of the most wonderful aspects of online dialogue. I am someone who loves to go back and study and think about things over and over and analyze them to my heart's content, so it is with delight that I look upon this ability to review a dialogue."
Brenda's comment describes perfectly the linear and cyclical nature of online dialogue. On the one hand, we carry on a conversation that flows linearly along time. We can perfectly sequence all the postings from the earliest to the latest based on the time stamps assigned to each. This is the explicit production that gets recorded. On the other hand, because of archiving, we are able to go back and revisit the old postings over and over again. We ruminate and reflect on what's been said. This implicit and cyclical thought process gives us the insights and understanding, which in turn produces the postings. There is a dialectical play between the linear production of the postings and cyclical process of the reflection.