ATDTDA Assessment of Pacing

[Tim Strzechowski]

If by "last week" you mean late Sunday night, then yes ... I began posting (2) because according to the original schedule I was supposed to begin posting (2) on Monday the 29th.  I've since put further (2) annotations on hold until next week when, according to the new schedule, I will begin.

I am planning to post additional annotations for pp. 29 - 31 this week.  In the meantime, I'm sitting back and watching discussion unfold on a variety of topics, including some excellent analysis by Paul Nightingale and others.  Also, other folks have posted annotations to enhance what Dave and I have done, as well as stuff we missed.  Since several people contacted me offlist regarding a need to digest the wealth of material from pages 1 to 31, I've adjusted the pacing to accommodate that type of discussion.  I hope it helps.

As most of us who have been here awhile know, the quality of discussion is what you make of it and in this forum any one post or thread can either die immediately or veer into further threaded discussion.  It's a bit early to "assess" how well that's happened because we've only really been at it a week and these sorts of discussions need to develop on their own over time.  In my opinion, adjusting the schedule to better allow those sorts of thread developments was a good thing.

Anyways, I'll post more items as soon as possible, and in the meantime folks can continue their threads accordingly.

Tim


-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: "David Morris" <fqmorris at gmail.com> 

> My 2 cents: 
> 
> Maybe we should *assess* how we are doing with the first schedule 
> before jumping to change it. As far as I can tell, ATDTDA(1) 
> discussion hasn't continued on from last week. It's now Day 2 of 
> ATDTDA(2), and very little AtD discussion is happening at all. 
> 
> I don't know why, but Tim started posting ATDTDA(2) last week, 
> although it was schedules to start yesterday, so our first week was 
> spent discussing both segments at the same time, perhaps adding to the 
> feeling by some that we were rushing things. 
> 
> I think we should watch what happens this week in terms of AtD 
> discussion (how much AtD traffic is really being generated), and see 
> if we really do need to slow down. 
> 
> David Morris 
> 
> On 1/30/07, Joseph T wrote: 
> > I would prefer to speed up rather than slow down. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20070130/13584c32/attachment.html>