ArtSCI meetings: Portand<Oregon
posted by Gabriel Harp (email@example.com), 20.11.2003, 16:39
Oh one more thing...I do think it would be useful if ASCI members were arranged by state, for example. Perhaps this could be on the website. It would be a huge boost to those interested in building local groups, and it would give some idea of the feasibility. Am I the only ACSI member in Portland or Oregon? Is ASCI composed of New York residents, etc, etc...
This is also plus if future meetings are to move location (e.g. chicago, sf, portland, santa fe, sioux falls).
Â»Â» Whew...just posted a long one...forum ate my message because I apparently
Â»Â» wasn't logged in- though I thought I was, or at least I did. Any chance
Â»Â» we can make it possible for anyone to post- thus reducing errors
Â»Â» associated w/logging in, passwords, etc.? I understand that membership
Â»Â» has its advantages- just a thought.
Â»Â» Here's the recap.
Â»Â» I agree completely that we should organize local meetings. The majors
Â»Â» (San Francisco, New York, London) are hotbeds of activity 1) because of
Â»Â» events like the recent symposium in Berkeley, the Einstein what-not in NYC
Â»Â» 2002, and the 2000 Spark festival in Kensington and 2) there is likely a
Â»Â» critical mass of folks interested in these things. Nonetheless, many of
Â»Â» us may feel isolated because of location and/or because there exist few
Â»Â» people around that share interest and/or expertise (synthesis is not an
Â»Â» easy proposition).
Â»Â» That said, I do not think ASCI should be responsible. The success and/or
Â»Â» failure of such groups depends completely on the motivation of those
Â»Â» involved, and no amount of oranizing by ASCI can change that. Obviously,
Â»Â» we are a group of highly motivated individuals with definite ideas.
Â»Â» Surely we can arrange something. ASCI's role has been that of
Â»Â» facilitator, and I applaud its efforts to date. This board is a fine
Â»Â» example of those efforts. The problem is that perhaps the lack of an
Â»Â» institutional affiliation can make it difficult to find rallying points.
Â»Â» I was trained in science (biology), and we had lab group meetings every
Â»Â» week. Members of the group traded off presenting topics for discussion,
Â»Â» practicing upcoming public presentations, designing experiments, and
Â»Â» reviewing papers. The group need not be large (five is a great number),
Â»Â» but it is important that meeting are regular and objectives are realized.
Â»Â» We concentrated on host-parasite interactions, and our aim was to publish
Â»Â» scholarly journal articles, define our ideas, and develop public
Â»Â» presentations. I feel that local meetings should be organized similarly-
Â»Â» in the interest of advancing the state of the field. Think of the
Â»Â» progress that could be made if tens of these groups organized, and as a
Â»Â» result contributed at least one presentation to the annual meeting. Then
Â»Â» we have a basis of comparison for the effectiveness of collaboration-
Â»Â» particularly wrt group membership.
Â»Â» Anyway, here's to getting a lab group up and running in Portland, Oregon.
Â»Â» Yes, Eugene, you too. I'm new to portland, but there is a lecture series
Â»Â» here for those interested http://www.lectureseries.org. As
Â»Â» described above, I'm interested in something a bit more errr...shall we
Â»Â» I critique your manuscript if you critique mine...