> 2) We can also use a little "blackmail." If any of them would be willing,
> why not get some of the really big names in one of the more conservative
> areas of English studies, to publish "e-version only" articles...for
> anyone in that field, an article by such a big name is a must, and it
> would force them to use the technology to get a copy. It would also be a
> strong argument in forcing them to accept e-publishing (via the
> credibility of the big name...if they accept it, it must be okay).
To be overly honest, this was one of the main reasons I was terribly excited
to have Andrea Lunsford contribute to the first issue of Kairos. I believe
it is called "Leeching Ethos" ... :<)
Seriously, though, the Lunsford (et al -- Mike Salvo loves getting collapsed
into that abbreviation, right "et"?) hypertext is, I believe, the most
widely-"hit" text in our first issue. Think that might have more to do with
who wrote it than what it says or does?
It's a fine piece, and I think it does important things ... but as Mark
points out, this is as much about a "big-name-must" ...
When I put that web on my prelims reading list under "Rhetorical Invetion,"
Karen Burke LeFevre said to me, "Oh, I'd like to read that ... can you print
me out a copy?" I told her "no" ... (not out of spite but because it would
be nonsensical to do so given the multimlinear structure) and she laughed and
said "I guess I have to learn to read it online, then!"
Cool, huh, Mark?
(still recoiling from Eric's earlier "striking" of him)