> Ideally, in my mind, this forum would only be open to > people open to changing their mind on occasion (not > that they have to - just be open to the possibility). > That is about as possible as the Pope converting to > Islam tomorrow, so I am fresh out of ideas. I am > curious to see what develops. > > Jim
Let me propose a different model: math-teach is used by various networks (invisible colleges, schools of thought) to compare notes and keep in touch with peers.
Given it's a shared resource, math-teach also gives these same schools the ability to lurk in on each other, perhaps getting involved in cross-talk, maybe religious warrior in flavor, maybe more diplomatic and ecumenical.
But however that may be, there's no prerequisite that anyone declare themselves especially vulnerable to mind changing.
You could expect the opposite: die-hards becoming even more die-hard, with a few defections we probably never hear about (unless the side switchers choose to be vocal about it).
Is what I just described a complete waste of bandwidth, even if no one changes position? No. Because the schools are keeping in touch, keeping tabs. The informational feedback is happening. Like, I post to gnu math teachers, most of them committed, unlikely to want to return to the "bad old days" of everyday algebra. But given they sleuth here for posts, they also get to look in on some of the raging debates of our day. That's informative.
Another description of this is the "around the water cooler" model (design pattern). We're from very different floors of the building, have different job descriptions and perspectives, but we meet here at the water cooler to swap amongst ourselves, including with peers from distant hallways (or not, if a "list mom" shows up, and shoos us all away).