I read Lamont's sticky in the main DIR section related to topics that are considered trolling, and in one case he gave an example of something that used to be a DIR policy but is no longer. That means that at some point a decision was made to change an existing policy through some sort of decision-making process. That reminded me of a topic that came up a year or so ago as a part of a thread, and I thought I would chew on it a little here.
In the past, if someone brought up a concept that was not DIR in the forum, it was easy to just say that it wasn't DIR. Hopefully that would be followed by an explanation of why it was not DIR, but the point is that one could say definitively that something was or was not DIR because there was a mechanism that would determine that and define it with a clear voice.
Today both GUE and UTD are considered DIR, and I am not sure about NAUI Tech. There are points on which they do not agree, and on those points of disagreement it is no longer possible to say "that is not DIR" because there is no authoritative voice to determine that.
Let's take a look at the disagreement last year related to labeling stage bottles with MODs. Although I was not part of it, I do know that UTD's position on that topic was derived after an extended and at times lively email debate among its instructional staff. One could say that its present state evolved through that discussion, and somehow (I don't know how) a decision was made.
I have no idea how GUE's contrary position was determined.
There are other differences. I have been close enough to some decision making to see that policies are continuing to evolve. Decisions are going to be made, and more differences will evolve.
I am planning to talk about one or more areas of dispute in other threads. In this thread, I am interested in seeing how others feel about this.
In the past, if someone brought up a concept that was not DIR in the forum, it was easy to just say that it wasn't DIR. Hopefully that would be followed by an explanation of why it was not DIR, but the point is that one could say definitively that something was or was not DIR because there was a mechanism that would determine that and define it with a clear voice.
Today both GUE and UTD are considered DIR, and I am not sure about NAUI Tech. There are points on which they do not agree, and on those points of disagreement it is no longer possible to say "that is not DIR" because there is no authoritative voice to determine that.
Let's take a look at the disagreement last year related to labeling stage bottles with MODs. Although I was not part of it, I do know that UTD's position on that topic was derived after an extended and at times lively email debate among its instructional staff. One could say that its present state evolved through that discussion, and somehow (I don't know how) a decision was made.
I have no idea how GUE's contrary position was determined.
There are other differences. I have been close enough to some decision making to see that policies are continuing to evolve. Decisions are going to be made, and more differences will evolve.
I am planning to talk about one or more areas of dispute in other threads. In this thread, I am interested in seeing how others feel about this.