The number one objection people seem to have to the FenceSitting position (for the NMC 2004 Small Pieces event) is that it straddles a false dichotomy. I couldn’t agree more, so what I propose to do is specifically draw out the existing points of convergence between the centralized and decentralized poles, and hopefully illustrate where this process might be headed. But I need your help.
Based on the suggestions people have placed on the FenceSitter section of the wiki, I’ve drawn out a couple of issues to focus the argument a little more tightly:
I propose we define Fencesitting as protesting the false dichotomy between centralized and decentralized systems, by suggesting that hybrids and complementary strategies not only are the best approach, but are already emerging.
I devised that wording very quickly, so suggestions or revisions are more than welcome.
To make things a bit more specific I laid out a few topics where we might begin to sketch out why we’ve taken this position… again somewhat arbitrarily and I invite ideas to improve the process.
Here are the topics I listed, which I began seeding with examples:
* Centralized systems are best at…
* Decentralized systems are best at…
* Centralized systems acting like decentralized systems
* Decentralized systems acting like centralized systems…
* Other points of convergence
Again, I want to stress I’m not overly attached to this scheme… I just wanted to sketch out a framework that people might feel comfortable filling in. I’d be grateful for any contribution. Please feel free to offer suggestions how to refine these admittedly arbitrary categories (I really am an arbitrary sort…), or to propose alternative frameworks for building an example-based argument.
