Remote Ready Biology Learning Activities has 50 remote-ready activities, which work for either your classroom or remote teaching.
A digital ecosystem, fueled by serendipity.
Serendip is an independent site partnering with faculty at multiple colleges and universities around the world. Happy exploring!
 | 40th Street Community Forum |
Comments are posted in the order in which they are received, with earlier postings appearing first below on this page. To see the latest postings, click on "Go to last comment" below.
| Greetings .... Name: Paul Grobstein Date: 2004-02-15 11:50:09 Link to this Comment: 8169 |
Like other forum areas on Serendip, this is a place for public informal conversation. Read what other people have to say, and leave your own thoughts and reactions for others. The idea is that thoughts in progress are important: everyone can learn from what other people are thinking, and have their own thoughts affected by reading the thoughts of others.
We at Serendip are pleased to be supporting this conversation, not only for what it can do for your community but also as an exploration of what the web can do to help build stronger communities in general. So thanks for your contributions to that also. And, if you're at all inclined, we'd be pleased to have you browse around other Serendip locations as well.
| Buidling on success Name: Harris Sok Date: 2004-02-15 14:18:45 Link to this Comment: 8171 |
| Last Night's Forum Name: Harris Ste Date: 2004-02-18 12:55:01 Link to this Comment: 8264 |
| Engaging the Stakeholders Name: Alan Krigm Date: 2004-02-18 18:27:34 Link to this Comment: 8273 |
All were in attendance last night at the Rotunda for a community forum focused on the future development of 40th Street."
-----------------------------------------------------------------
What the DP didn't state was that of the, what, nearly 100 business owners on the relevant blocks, only four were in attendance. And these are the folks most likely to be highly impacted by anything that's done. Likewise, the DP didn't report that of the community people who live at the north end of the "corridor," many of whom have few options as to shopping for their essential needs and services beyond the immediate vicinity in which they live, almost (or maybe precisely) none were there.
Why not? I'll assume that Dr Sokoloff indeed visited all the businesses along the strip and invited the owners to this session. Maybe the problem is that the population of businesspeople and residents in question is culturally disinclined to attend meetings. The affected parties have to be approached for inputs and information exchanges in other ways. Perhaps (and this is just a guess) by visiting them one-on-one in their own zones of comfort. Understanding and appreciating cultural diversity to the extent needed to actually work with people, to include them in planning, means a lot more than enjoying seeing folks walking around in colorful garments and speaking melodically exotic languages, and smiling at them on the sidewalk or even being so bold as to say "Hello, "Hola," "Ni How," or whatever (a lesson I'm admittedly not doing well enough learning myself, although at least I think I'm not as oblivious to it as I used to be).
Failure to do this will result in yet another top-down program which the promoters justify by saying "we held public meetings," implying that they got the participation of the affected stakeholders when in fact they did no such thing. As, unfortunately, has been the case with several current "projects" in our area.
Surely, there are individuals at Penn, one of the great universities of the world, with genuine expertise at engaging people who don't come from democratic, participatory backgrounds and to whom the idea of a non-obligatory public meeting makes no sense at all. Individuals, for instance, to whom "officials" connote "authority" rather than dialog. The organizers of this project owe it to the community -- indeed they owe it to their own consciences -- to find these experts and bring them into the process so we can all be more confident in having made made a truly honest effort to involve everyone.
Al Krigman
housing provider (KRF Corp)
University City
| We are seeking comments and advise Name: S. Sharrie Date: 2004-02-26 10:16:14 Link to this Comment: 8521 |
The process is designed to allow more stakeholders to
get involved with the "guiding principals" of the corridor.
Penn is responding to public criticism and taking a new
approach. For now, lets put past surveys and reports behind
us and think freshly.
Ultimately, any development is going to be controlled by
those who put their money where their mouth is. Any
business that decides to locate there will be doing
so based on economic decisions and not solely for
the "guiding principals". It will be helpful if there are
concrete recommendations that have come from a varied
group of local stakeholders before development begins.
That is the goal.
It was insightful of Penn to take an "outside of the box"
approach this time around and also to realize that 40th Street
needs more partners. Penn doesn't always need to dominate
local development. The Restaurant School is an example of
a local partner that has stepped up to the plate and hit
a home run.
Penn, by virtue of their resources will always be a
strength. (even a silent gorilla at the table will
get your attention)
The current process will allow "locals" to make
suggestions on big-box or small-box, local-owned or
outside-owned businesses, franchises or small local
grown businesses (Marvelous on 40th) , more arts and
culture related or service based businesses as well
as seeing 40th street as a destination.
Jim Lilly is a local resident opening a franchise operation.
Does it make it more appealing that a local person is the
operator?
Local business owners on 40th street were all invited to the
recent forum and are mostly people that do not live locally.
Their sense of "community" is different than those of us who
live here. As someone who has been organizing community
meetings for the past 14 years, I can tell you that they seldom
come out to "community" meetings or events. The business
owners are more interested in issues that they see effecting their
day to day operations and bottom line, their time is also very
limited.
Tell as many people as you can about the forums and encourage
them to get involved, share their opinion or become a partner on
the corridor.
S.
| "West Bank Square" Name: S. Sharrie Date: 2004-02-26 10:28:27 Link to this Comment: 8522 |
A open space plan like this one would give 40th
street the tourism boost it needs.
Mixed use developmenmt, commercial/residential
is most desirable for future.
S.
| 40th., merchants, integration Name: Magali Lar Date: 2004-02-29 13:26:47 Link to this Comment: 8560 |
| Concerns about the Penn Praxis process Name: RRorke Date: 2004-03-01 10:34:47 Link to this Comment: 8582 |
In addition to Mr. Krigman's concerns about representation at these meetings, and whether meetings truly engage stakeholders, I have concerns about the nature and process of this 'dialog' taking place about the fate of 40th Street, a public thoroughfare that 'mirrors who we are' and where 'traditions merge.'
From what I've read in the Daily Pennsylvanian, the University City Review, and on this website, these meetings are led by Penn, hosted by Penn, officiated by Penn, facilitated by Penn: Omar Blaik, Penn's Vice President of Real Estate and Facilities Services; Harris Steinberg, Penn School of Design professor and Penn Praxis Executive Director; Harris Sokoloff, executive director of the Center for School Study Councils in the Graduate School of Education. In addition, the 'community-based' steering committee for these meetings -- about half of whose members are Penn-affiliated -- was put together by Penn (Glenn Bryan, Penn's Director of City and Community Relations). Each meeting's agenda and structure -- not to mention their timing and frequency -- are decided on by Penn, and the content of these meetings, including the series of questions and topics participants are asked to respond to, are framed and designed by Penn.
The articles go on to point out that these Penn-hosted meetings are modeled after the same kind of Penn-hosted civic interactions that took place during Jan - Mar 2003 regarding the development of the Delaware River waterfront. And the articles go on to point out how Penn is not taking a leadership role in development, is taking a hands-off approach, is one voice among many. This website describes the process as one in which experts 'establish a foundation of common knowledge' which is then used to build 'a productive, facilitated conversation' so that 'we, the citizens create the principles' which 'incorporate the goals and values of all who participate.'
In light of this news, what steps are being taken to ensure that this model of civic discourse isn't, in fact, a co-option of the public will by a non-elected institution that has assumed the role of authority, by organizing the 'community table,' framing the dialog, designing the ways results are counted, interpreted, and put to use, etc. -- all while presenting it as something 'of, by, and for' citizens? What mechanisms are in place to ensure that the outcomes of this process are not merely a self-congratulatory confirmation of the expectations and interests of those who have guided the conversation and populated the participation, rather than of all who will be affected? What, finally, are the implications of such a model on the definition of citizenship as we know it?
I ask this in the spirit of looking forward to the future (as indeed the instructions to this forum explicitly suggest I do, along with leaving histories at the door). And while looking ahead, I am trying to examine the shifting grounds and premises for what constitutes 'working together' and 'public engagement' and the 'deliberative process,' especially as they relate to Penn's future development east of its campus and Penn Praxis' continuing 'efforts around the country to engage citizens in deliberation about the future of their communities -- local, regional and national.'
Thoughts? Comments? Thanks.
| Shopping Avenue Name: Linda Amst Date: 2004-03-03 13:01:24 Link to this Comment: 8655 |
| Ongoing Discussion Name: Harris Ste Date: 2004-03-04 14:52:45 Link to this Comment: 8672 |
I'd like to take a minute to respond to some issues that have been raised. The issue of who is attending the 40th Street forums and who isn't is an important point. We, the steering committee, have been very careful in trying to be as inclusive as possible in our outreach efforts - and yet, we all know, that we can always do better.
Towards that end, in response to what we have heard, we are hosting a special breakfast meeting for 40th Street area merchants on 3/10/04 at 7:30AM in the Rotunda. Merchants are being asked to RSVP to the Office of Commuinty Relations at 215-898-3565. We are exploring other possible smaller gatherings as well.
Please also recall that in addition to the wealth of information that is housed on this website - all of this information is also incldued in outreach binders located at 6 reading locations in the community:
Walnut Street West Free Library
3927 Walnut Street
215-685-7671
Office of the Honorable James R. Roebuck, Jr.
4800 Baltimore Avenue
215-724-2227
Penn's Office of Community Relations
Suite 507, 133 South 36th Street
215-898-3565
House of Our Own Bookstore
3920 Spruce Street
215-222-1576
Partnership CDC
4020 Market Street
215-662-1612
Community College of Philadelphia
4725 Chestnut Street
267-299-5863 or 267-299-5851
Another issue raised is that Penn is the one convening the meeting. This is true - Penn is. But it is not a "co-option of the public will." Rather, Penn, as a long-standing member of this community, is aksing people to talk about their goals and dreams and visions. No one is being forced to participate. This is offered as a constructive, positive process in which Penn is sharing its talents and resources in helping to bring people to the community table in a respectful manner.
It's in all of our interests to work together towards developing shared goals. We won't know if we share any goals unless we figure out how to talk with each other. And this is what we're doing - talking and working together to create a set of shared principles or common values that will become the way that we (all of us - not just Penn) think and talk about 40th Street.
Let's all work on figuring out what's important to us and figure out a way to say "yes" rather than "no." There is no hidden agenda. Penn, as an institution, has come to understand, in a meaningful way, the value of community engagement. This process is genuine.
We learned at Penn's Landing that you can bring people together to talk about issues of import and help create safe and structured arenas for public discourse. Can we do better - of course we can. Help make this process better through your active participation.
Name: Paul Grobstein Date: 2004-03-07 15:55:37 Link to this Comment: 8718 |
Concerns about "power" and "control" (hidden and otherwise) such as those raised by Alan Krigman and RRorke are not only appropriate at the outset of any community building effort but probably inevitable. At the very least, they are far from unique to the 40th Street context. The Serendip forums themselves have on occasion prompted similar concerns about who's in control. The following challenge and response (see archive) took place in an on-line forum we created immediately following the events of 11 September 2001, and seems relevant here (both generally and, perhaps, locally):
My apologies. Serendip and this forum were conceived, have always functioned, and will always function on the principle that the greatest wisdom emerges from the interested and respectful sharing of the widest possible range of human perspectives. Like other humans, I personally have my own idiosyncratic perspectives (subject to changes reflecting the sharing) and, like other humans, I sometimes say things in more private contexts which, out of a wish not to discourage others from sharing their perspectives on matters under discussion, I would not say in more public ones. I regret that an email in which I used the term "jingoistic" somehow reached you and led you to feel your perspectives might not be welcome in this forum. They are, not only welcome but valued. My apologies, and wishes that we can continue to exchange ideas on the important matters at hand, without raising issues of personal integrity. The latter is itself destructive of the free exchange of perspectives.
... Paul Grobstein, 18 September
No human being is, or should be expected to be without their own personal "idiosyncratic perspectives" and personal agendas, and that includes the human beings who try and encourage community conversation. What can be reasonably asked (on 40th Street and in general) is that such people be open about their own perspectives/agendas, put their interests in community conversation ahead of such perspectives/agenda, and, even more importantly, make it clear to all that their own personal perspectives/agendas are open to modification by the community conversation.
While "establish a foundation" and "facilitated conversation" are phrases that might, as RRorke indicates, raise some concerns, it looks from the outside (for whatever that's worth) as if there is in fact "no "boogie-man" or conspiracy here", that the initiative really is "to work together towards developing shared goals". Its always worth being alert for problems, but community building requires as well that wariness be balanced with some measure of trust, and a willingness to give everyone a chance to prove (or disprove) their trustworthiness. On 40th Street and elsewhere.
Another related, and perhaps useful, "outsider" thought is that all of us may need to re-examine our own tendencies to always see things in terms of "power", and of an opposition between distributed ["the people"] and centralized responsibility/control. Here too I think there is a quite general issue : a need for everyone to change old habits of thought in order to genuinely build communities (see here for another case that made me think about it). My suggestion is that we should not think of "centralized" entities as the locations of power and authority (and they should not think of themselves that way). Instead we should keep in mind that centralized entities always succeed or fail precisely to the extent that they successfully bring about the kind of sharing of stories among individuals out of which genuinely new and wiser stories emerge.
Power, in the long run at least, is actually distributed among all of us as individuals, and in the commonalities we find among ourselves. To the extent we fail to exercise that power as individuals, by not telling our own stories and listening to those of others, we are complicit in the default of power to centralized entities. So ... the best way to make sure that community building is reflective of the community (on 40th Street and elsewhere) is for individuals to get involved in the building, and to get as many other individuals as possible also involved in it.
Thanks to all for what you've taught me so far. Very much looking forward to hearing more stories from more people, and seeing what kind of community you all build.
| 4Oth street landscape Name: rick Date: 2004-03-09 16:29:57 Link to this Comment: 8722 |
| General Commentary Name: Matthew Wo Date: 2004-03-11 01:15:08 Link to this Comment: 8724 |
The University City Republican Committee has undertaken its own study of 40th Street and its potential. We report back to the community in an effort to add to the discussion currently taking place. What follows is a drastically shortened version. If you would like to review the entire commentary, contact Matthew Wolfe at Matthew@Wolfe.org.
The meetings that have been held were allegedly to develop a set of principles to be followed in planning for 40th Street. What does that mean? It is hard to say. Guidelines? Recommendations? Directives? Well, we are not as smart (or as pretentious) as the people running this formal process, so rather than developing principles, we will suffice ourselves with coming up with Stuff We Should Talk About regarding 40th Street.
Stuff One: It's about the market, stupid!
We can talk about this and that, but if we are talking commercial for 40th Street, whatever happens must be responsive to the market. Just building it does not mean that they will come. It is not about what we want, but about what the market will bear.
There are several potential groups that would provide markets. First, there are college students. Lots of them. Permanent residents are another market. Although there is no bright line, it would be ignoring the obvious is it was not noted that there is a distinction between relatively upscale University City and the relatively economically depressed rest of West Philly (is that diplomatic enough?). To over-generalize, these are two separate groups and markets. Another market consists of people from outside the neighborhood. Some work in the area, normally for our local institutions. Others do not work here and come simply for the amenities of 40th Street and University City in general. While more of these people can be lured to 40th Street, it is more likely that they will remain a small segment of the market.
Stuff Two: MALL ! We don't need your stinkin' mall.
40th Street should not look like a suburban mall. Not because that's what we want, but because that's what will work. This is an urban strip and it should look like one.
As an urban area, we have advantages and disadvantages. Most of our patrons will walk there. The real estate itself is broken down into small rowhouse sized units. There are already some residents on 40th Street and where there can be more mixed-use (commercial downstairs/apartments upstairs), whether in renovation of existing properties or construction of new properties, that probably makes a revitalization of 40th Street closer to a reality.
Stuff Three: It's bad if someone gets run over.
This development should be done with pedestrians as a priority. There are lots of people who live within a 15-minute walk of 40th Street. People will be driving there, but those who do will drive, park and then walk. There is limited on-street parking, but the huge (and ugly) garage that Penn built at 40th and Walnut should be sufficient for the foreseeable future. 40th Street is well served by public transportation.
40th Street should be planned to make it attractive to walk its length. The businesses should have attractive facades. The metal grates that close in many of their windows when the store is closed have to go. Landscaping is an important component.
Perhaps the single component that we have the least control over that affects this development is the impact of Chestnut and Walnut Streets. It is important, from a pedestrian's perspective, that traffic on Chestnut and Walnut is slowed downThey seem to be moving towards turning them from 3-4 traffic lanes (one parking lane becomes a travel lane during rush hour) to 2-3 traffic lanes. That is a start. The lights need to be timed so that pedestrians get not just equal time but an advantage.
Stuff Four: Being in favor of economic development does not mean that you are a racist.
Gentrification. Displacement. Bad words? Evil concepts? Not really.
Let's first say that we are not going to apologize for saying that 40th Street should move towards stronger economic development. Rising property values is a good thing, not a bad thing. Development occurs and property values rise in commercial areas because the businesses in those areas are attracting customers who are spending more money. This creates jobs and wealth.
On the whole, the market that probably holds the most promise is the student market, and to a lesser degree, the upscale University City residents market. They are more likely to be attracted to dining and entertainment rather than retail or service establishments. The student market also goes later into the evening and businesses that cater to that market will be a good fit. There is certainly a dearth of locations where you can have a drink and listen to live music. A good mini-example might be the 3400 block of Sansom Street. Another example might be Main Street in Manayunk. Even the retail is an entertainment experience and more unique retailers tend to locate there.
Stuff Five: What are we, afraid of commitment?
One problem in turning 40th Street into a thriving commercial strip is that it is not wholly commercial. The east side of 40th between Spruce and Walnut is devoid of commercial, but for the library at Walnut. There is a surface parking lot (the lowest and worst use of urban land) at Sansom Street. The east side between Ludlow and Market is parking and landscaping. The first thing that we should do is fill those areas in.
Another level of commitment goes to strengthening our commercial strips at the expense of sporadic commercial development. The corner store will always have its utility, but there is a reason for planning and zoning. Most people want to live around other neighbors. If businesses are grouped together, a single customer is more likely to patronize multiple establishments. To the extent that incentives could be developed to encourage and assist commercial ventures in residential areas to move to a commercial corridor, it strengthens both the individual businesses and the strip itself.
Stuff Five: Don't be afraid to take a stand.
One of the problems in dealing with University City issues is that there is a core of community leaders who are afraid to take a stand because they are concerned that someone will be upset, that there will be controversy or confrontation or that their stand is not "politically correct." These candy-asses do us no good. Frankly, we will be surprised if the Stuff we have raised makes it to the final table, so to speak. Particularly where we advocate higher end market-based economic development we expect that the powers that be are unwilling to say that and risk the flack they would receive. We recognize that there are arguments against the Stuff we point out and we respect that. If you disagree with our positions, that's fine, but do so because you think there is a better way, not because you are trying to avoid criticism. A CONCENSUS WILL NOT BE REACHED. We are better off arguing about these issues now rather than being afraid to take any stand at all that may smack of controversy.
| Response to UC Republican Committe Name: Jennifer R Date: 2004-03-11 14:05:21 Link to this Comment: 8726 |
From: Jennifer Rodríguez, 40th Street Steering Committee Member
Re: Comments about 40th Street published 3/11/04
__________________________________________________________________
Thanks for contributing to the continuing discussion about 40th Street.
In response to the comments published on 3/11/04 by your committee I would like to make the following remarks:
Contrary to what you published comments indicate, the process that Penn Praxis and the steering committee are undertaking is not a study, but a dialogue. The forums are not meant to make a definitive statement on the future of 40th St, quite the contrary, the objective is to establish a dialogue between Penn and the community about the future of the corridor; we are not looking for consensus, we are looking for voices. The result will not be a plan, but a set of guiding principles that we hope will be adopted by stakeholders with any interest in the corridor. Claiming that we can dictate the type of development that should occur along 40th Street would be presumptuous since, as acknowledged in your comments, the market will dictate what establishments will locate, which ones will thrive and which ones will not survive. Urban markets, however, are misunderstood and underrated and we can do something to correct this flaw.
Through this public process Penn Praxis and the steering committee have tried to educate the public about the characteristics that make 40th street special (diversity, access, variety in uses, users and lot size, and not to be forgotten: purchasing power), and we have also asked the public to tell us what they value about this corridor today and what values they would like to see adopted in the future. Hopefully, the University, merchants, and other stakeholders will pay attention and think before they leap into their next development projects. The corridor does not have a single controlling entity, which makes it impossible to direct the planning and development, but by establishing this dialogue we are creating a voice with the potential to influence what takes place.
Once the process culminates, it will be difficult for local institutions and the government to take a position that is contrary to the principles that are developed, which in my view is very positive. The public process has been transparent and inclusive; its participants have been responsible and constructive, overall a model for future public engagement processes and a great tool to help communities shape their future. The final outcomes are unknown, but the conversation has been well worth the effort.
| Coffee shop Name: Linda Amst Date: 2004-03-11 14:13:11 Link to this Comment: 8727 |
I think it would be just great if Paris Cafe (at 41st and Sansom) could be lured to the Sassy's storefront, or the United bank storefront, at 40th and Chestnut.
Paris Cafe is a wonderful establishment, with gourmet coffee, muffins, and more substantial food. It just happens to be in a poorly traffic'd spot. The new location could be a hangout place for students and business people (many of whom are a stone's throw from that intersection, of which I am!) It could be open, and open late, which would help with the security/safety issue of people picking up the L at 40th and Market.
It is just what that intersection needs.
Linda Amsterdam
Common Ground Realtors
| Response to Matt Wolfe Name: Jennifer R Date: 2004-03-11 14:45:50 Link to this Comment: 8729 |
From: Jennifer Rodríguez, 40th Street Steering Committee Member
Re: Comments about 40th Street published 3/11/04
__________________________________________________________________
Thanks for contributing to the continuing discussion about 40th Street.
In response to the comments published on 3/11/04 by your committee I would like to make the following remarks:
Contrary to what your published comments indicate, the process that Penn Praxis and the steering committee are undertaking is not a study, but a dialogue. The forums are not meant to make a definitive statement on the future of 40th St, quite the contrary, the objective is to establish a dialogue between Penn and the community about the future of the corridor; we are not looking for consensus, we are looking for voices. The result will not be a plan, but a set of guiding principles that we hope will be adopted by stakeholders with any interest in the corridor. Claiming that we can dictate the type of development that should occur along 40th Street would be presumptuous since, as acknowledged in your comments, the market will dictate what establishments will locate, which ones will thrive and which ones will not survive. Urban markets, however, are misunderstood and underrated and we can do something to correct this flaw.
Through this public process Penn Praxis and the steering committee have tried to educate the public about the characteristics that make 40th street special (diversity, access, variety in uses, users and lot size, and not to be forgotten: purchasing power), and we have also asked the public to tell us what they value about this corridor today and what values they would like to see adopted in the future. Hopefully, the University, merchants, and other stakeholders will pay attention and think before they leap into their next development projects. The corridor does not have a single controlling entity, which makes it impossible to direct the planning and development, but by establishing this dialogue we are creating a voice with the potential to influence what takes place.
Once the process culminates, it will be difficult for local institutions and the government to take a position that is contrary to the principles that are developed, which in my view is very positive. The public process has been transparent and inclusive; its participants have been responsible and constructive, overall a model for future public engagement processes and a great tool to help communities shape their future. The final outcomes are unknown, but the conversation has been well worth the effort.
| meta-comment Name: Matthew Sn Date: 2004-03-16 15:24:02 Link to this Comment: 8841 |
Not to quibble over relatively minor things, but if the members of the steering committee really want this website to become one of the major discussion forums for this process, it might help to use software that's more full-featured. The display now is rather clunky and dry. There are no "threads" and it's difficult to quote other people's text. The only option to sort previous posts is by date. There is no way to login, so there are no stored preferences.
Successful web-based discussion forums usually have a lot of (and possibly too many) features. The bells and whistles undeniably attract people. As an example of what I'm talking about, check out the PHPBB software at http://www.phpbb.com.
(Alternately, a mailing list with web archiving might serve just as well.)
| on-line forum styles Name: Paul Grobstein Date: 2004-03-17 09:05:05 Link to this Comment: 8848 |
Its actually we at Serendip, rather than the "members of the steering committee" who need to answer for the "clunky and dry" forum. And we appreciate/will take into consideration the concerns Mathew expressed, thanking him as well for including the "(possibly too many) features" characterization of other forums. We've actually done pretty well with our home grown forum software (see, eg, 11 September 2001), but are always interested in ways to do better.
In the meanwhile, there are some aspects of this forum worth noticing, if one hasn't. If you click on the "Keep me posted" icon (top or bottom of the forum), you can register for the equivalent of "a mailing list with web archiving", ie you will get an email with a direct link to the forum on any evening when a posting has been made, so you don't have to remember to check the forum itself.
Every message in the forum is uniquely identified by the "message id" (just below the date in a posting). You can use this to make direct links to earlier messages, as I did at the beginning of this posting. Instructions are on the "Post Comments" page:
There's an ongoing debate about whether "keep it simple" or "bells and whistles" is the best way to "attract people" less familiar with computer technology. Our guess is that people are different, some more attracted by one approach, some by the other. Serendip tends to favor the "keep it simple approach", feeling that its better in the long run if people acquire some sense of the "insides" of what they're working with along the way. But we also agree that "keep it simple" sometimes is best served by making it easier to do some things.
You can "quote other people's text" simply by cutting and pasting (for this its probably easiest if you have two browser windown active at the same time), but this may be one of those situations where we could usefully make things easier.
"Threading" (arranging things so that people can comment specifically on someone else's comments and then comments can be made on those comments, with a corresponding tree like display of the relatedness among comments) is indeed a common forum feature, but one with pros and cons. On the one hand, it makes it easier to see a set of comments on one topic. On the other, it tends to encourage people to read and comment on only what they think they're interested in, so conversation tends to fragment. In addition, some people find threading "easier" to understand, others find it less so.
Bottom line: on-line forums (like 40th street?) have an organic character. Their organization at any given time reflects a healthy mix of perspectives, is never quite "right" but works (better in some ways, less well in others), and is always evolving to get it less wrong. Thanks to Mathew (and others, including Magali), for contributions to the evolution of Serendip's forums.
Name: ellen reyn Date: 2004-03-17 11:36:42 Link to this Comment: 8850 |
Thank you,
Ellen Reynolds
| Forum Name: Harris Ste Date: 2004-03-17 14:01:49 Link to this Comment: 8856 |
Thanks for your thoughtful query. Please refer to the "Project" page of this web site for all of the material that has been handed out and produced during the forums. The Monday night meeting was good - a robust conversation about the draft principles and how to move forward. People basically accepted the broad outline of the six principles (which are accessible under the handouts from the 3/15/04 event). All information continues to be added to the notebooks at the five reading locations (there is a hot link in the text on the left hand side of the home page of this web site).
A lot of the conversation focused on possible next steps. The group agreed that there was merit in forming a larger community-based committee or task force to use the principles to continue to cultivate a community process about the future of 40th Street. The sense of the group was that an enlarged committee, which drew heavily from community representatives with specific interests, skills and engagement along 40th Street, could be helpful in moving the process forward. There was also a strong sense that this was preferable to depending on Penn to continue the process. The steering committee was asked to help be the bridge between the forums and the enlarged committee.
I welcome thoughts and feedback from others who were there that night to augment or clarify what I've reported. Here are some things to think about as we move forward:
1. What does "taking ownership of the process" mean?
2. What would that look like?
3. What kind of authority might this group expect to have?
4. Are there established models or examples of how to effectively organize an advocacy group for 40th Street? What are they?
5. Protecting the mix and diversity along 40th Street was a primary goal of everyone. How do we ensure this?
Looking forward to seeing what everyone thinks about this.
Harris Steinberg
| Final Principles Name: Matthew Wo Date: 2004-04-01 11:32:22 Link to this Comment: 9113 |
That being said, the written results of the process were worthless. The ?principles? were so weak that there may as well be no principles. The process used to develop them, which seemed to be taking 80 or so seemingly random thoughts that came out of four meetings broken down into smaller discussion groups and condensing them into a manageable number of principles, was ridiculous. In a never-ending effort to avoid controversy and be able to claim some moral high ground for being ?inclusive? (they were Creating Unity While Maintaining Diversity) the managers of the process mishandled what was potentially the most valuable component of the work that was done. What we needed were some principles that gave some direction and vision for the future of 40th Street. What we got were some feel-good but meaningless verbiage that at best highlights the obvious. If I want to open up a strip club on 40th Street, could I design a proposal that would fit into the principles? Sure.
The biggest problem with the principles is that they do not make clear that we need economic development that will be supportive of the institution of Motherhood. Somewhere they could have at least mentioned Apple Pie.
All is not lost. One favorable result of having no firm principles is that we can continue the dialogue, which the last principle encourages. We do not really have any principles to tie us down, so as more concrete plans develop from Penn or some of the other landowners on 40th Street the structure that was set up can react and give input. While it might be nice to rely on some written principles to guide development, the reality is that regardless of any principles we did develop it will be the work and input of individuals that will shape the future of 40th Street and the rest of the neighborhood.
| University City Trolley Day Name: Mark Chris Date: 2004-10-12 15:30:54 Link to this Comment: 11084 |
| Women's-Self Defense Class in West Philly Name: Debasri Gh Date: 2004-10-28 12:10:29 Link to this Comment: 11246 |
| Welcome Back Name: Harris Ste Date: 2004-12-01 16:05:42 Link to this Comment: 11833 |
| Friends Arts Task Force Name: Lucy Kerma Date: 2004-12-02 14:49:33 Link to this Comment: 11852 |
| 40th St. History; c. 1900; Farmer's Market? Name: Jack Falli Date: 2005-01-03 16:14:01 Link to this Comment: 12017 |
| CELL PHONE DONATION PROGRAM Name: Lucy Kerma Date: 2005-01-28 13:39:49 Link to this Comment: 12289 |
| One more phone donation site Name: Lucy Kerma Date: 2005-01-28 16:09:34 Link to this Comment: 12290 |
| LIBRARY LETTER CAMPAIGN Name: Cassi Pitt Date: 2005-02-07 12:44:39 Link to this Comment: 12600 |
| Article in the Daily Pennsylvanian Name: Sarena Date: 2005-04-12 17:12:40 Link to this Comment: 14526 |
| SEPTA Community Mtg. Name: pittman Date: 2005-05-02 15:16:26 Link to this Comment: 15017 |
| Free Business Law Seminar Name: Clara Flor Date: 2005-05-04 15:36:22 Link to this Comment: 15037 |
FREE BUSINESS LAW SEMINAR
May 17, 18, and 19 at 6:00 PM
at Penn Alexander School Community School
(Entrance is located on 43rd St., between Locust and Spruce Sts.)
Topics: Forming Business (Legal Form and City Filings), Real Estate Leasing & Purchasing, General Employment Law, Intellectual Law
For registration, contact Clara Flores via email cflores@sas.upenn.edu or at (215) 823-5288.
There is FREE childcare available to program participants.
| Arts Task Force Name: Lucy Kerma Date: 2005-06-20 17:28:14 Link to this Comment: 15358 |
Name: Jessica Fi Date: 2006-02-07 09:58:39 Link to this Comment: 18004 |
| Town Hall on Crime Name: Chuck Will Date: 2006-05-04 11:57:57 Link to this Comment: 19223 |
| Forum Archived Name: Webmaster Date: 2007-01-25 21:39:17 Link to this Comment: 21408 |
