Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

[mdthomas AT mindspring.com]

>The list has been used of late to debate many 
>things... I've enjoyed it, but I understand 
>some people haven't and have asked if that is 
>what the list is for. 

Like the entire group, the list has been loosely 
purposed... I think it leads to some lively 
and interesting interactions.

I've tossed around an idea to address the "what 
the list is for" problem without going the 
mission-statement route... The reactions have 
varied from "it's kinda cool" to "that's evil!" 
I'll throw the refined version to the list, fully 
willing to accept a bash-a-rama. Also, I'm not
saying this is needed -- just an example of a way
to get around "mission statement" type structures.

"For each post, you can reply with encourage or 
discourage in the subject line. The anonymous 
encourages & discourages are tabulated on the 
back end, and after so many encourages/discourages 
(say 10 or 20) a note is sent to the original 
sender. Maybe the most 'encouraged' post in a month 
is posted to the web site." 

>It's all a matter of what the real purpose of Internet 
>Workers is - are we just a social club or are we the 
>beginning of something more? 

Probably the beginning of something more... nobody 
knows what though... our model to this point has 
been participant driven... what we do is what we 
do. There are no requirements to be a member and
the flip side is that any member is free to build
consensus and move the group in a new direction...
our upcoming bowling night being a perfect example
of this.

At the same time, there is no reason, per the
current model, that a more structured group couldn't
emerge from Internetworkers... the inet-dev group
for building the web site can be thought of as
an "in the family" example of that. Along the same
lines, "inet-charity" could be created to discuss
what charitable organizations are doing in the 
triangle, maybe with a focus on charitable orgs.
that appeal to high-techies...