SWJ: praise given and reviews (merged)

[SWJED]

We needed that boost (http://www.captainsjournal.com/2006/09/07/top-ten-blogs/) - if only to keep us sane. ;)

[SWJED]

From Herschel Smith at The Captain's Journal blog - Observations on Timeliness from the Small Wars Manual (http://www.captainsjournal.com/2006/10/02/observations-on-timeliness-from-the-small-wars-manual/).


Remaining highly recommended is the Marine Corps Small Wars Manual (http://www.smallwars.quantico.usmc.mil/SWM/1215.pdf) (large PDF document). The war in Afghanistan is more than 4.5 years old, and the war in Iraq is about 3.5 years old. The SWM has something to way about timeliness that will edify and enrich our understanding of the various blunders that have been made in these wars so far. By way of editorial note, I would comment that there seems to be an undercurrent among supporters of the war(s) that is unhealthy and unproductive for the prospective of evolution in our doctrine, strategy and tactics based on our mistakes. Analysis, assessment and constructive criticism are generally taken to be opposition to the war or to our warriors. To be seen as patriotic and supportive of our troops, one almost has to be jingoistic. This is not a mature attitude, but more importantly, it is not supportive of the necessary changes that will mark the future of warfare and thus the warriors who will be participating in those wars...

[Entropy]

Huge props to you guys from Kent's Imperative (http://kentsimperative.blogspot.com/2008/09/online-education-and-new-literature-of.html):


The new generation of virtual institutions we hope will also be a catalyst for the greater involvement of intelligence professions in the development of the literature in a form that can be shared more widely with the academia as a whole. We firmly believe that publication models such as Small Wars Journal will be the future of the literature. We have also already seen the impact of the virtual on the traditional, as the editorship of the International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence passed to Richard Valcourt of American Military University. No doubt we shall see other similar effects in the near future, and look forward to the improvement of the literature.

[SWJED]

Huge props to you guys from Kent's Imperative (http://kentsimperative.blogspot.com/2008/09/online-education-and-new-literature-of.html):

... the props belong to the Council and its members in many cases where SWJ is mentioned in stories and posts.

[Cavguy]

First,

Nothing but props for SWJ - performs a valuable service very, very, well.

Calling it a model the future of academic publishing is a stretch - unless we put some real rigorous peer review standards in place beyond the current forums. The key with academic journals is that submissions get reviewed by vetted experts in the field prior to publishing for accuracy of content and method.

For freewheeling, thought provoking, interactive discussion and debate, it's the right place.

[Rob Thornton]

I think there are a combination of things that point to SWJ (not sure I think there are any like it) as a strong candidate for the future:

1) Its appeal to a multi-discipline audience that is generally literate on the topic they choose to read and discuss (or at least interested in learning). With respect to the SWJ's chosen topic - this wide audience is particularly relevant.

2) Its primary accessibility by those with an ISP + the ability to copy, paste, print or send posts, articles, etc. around. While "hardcopy" is a wonderful thing, if that is a sole medium of distribution its more limited to choices made about what content it will have, who it will publish, and where it will be distributed (and as such a slower circulation of ideas).

3) Its ability as a forum to build around points 1 & 2 and create additional knowledge around new and existing content. This is done quickly while the issue is still relevant. This is huge - it flattens the learning curve in ways that are often hard to account for. It is the assimilation of ideas in ways that are user friendly to the tasks at hand. It is a combination of answering the "so what" and "how can I". The participants care little about being credited, only that the service is rendered. Generally I've seen the authors of pieces more then willing to interact with the community.

I could add that it has a pretty inclusive feel - meaning newcomers are welcomed until they demonstrate a reason why they should not be - even then they are usually given several chances.

Neil brings up an interesting point about academic standards, that may depend on who sets the academic standards. What I mean is how involved is the reader in setting the standard vs. the publisher? If the reader is more literate on the subject - meaning in this case the SWC being the "body" that judges vs. just an academic editor who might be well educated to look for errors IAW one of the style manuals - then whose standards are higher in terms of judging value?

While the editor of a publication must use some decision criteria to decide what goes in a defined volume from month to month or quarter to quarter - how is that different from the way an online pub like SWJ is set to take advantage of new information quickly?

I still see a place for hard copy only publications (to include those with an online version), but I prefer to view the relationship as complimentary - not competitive. If I had to choose just one though - I'd go with SWJ - or its future cousins.

Best, Rob

[Rex Brynen]

Calling it a model the future of academic publishing is a stretch - unless we put some real rigorous peer review standards in place beyond the current forums. The key with academic journals is that submissions get reviewed by vetted experts in the field prior to publishing for accuracy of content and method.

In addition, it will depend on whether academic institutions will decide to allocate any professional value to online publishing, blogging, forum moderation, etc. At the moment, they usually count for somewhere between "very little" and "nothing" for salary and promotion purposes.

[Steve Blair]

First,

Nothing but props for SWJ - performs a valuable service very, very, well.

Calling it a model the future of academic publishing is a stretch - unless we put some real rigorous peer review standards in place beyond the current forums. The key with academic journals is that submissions get reviewed by vetted experts in the field prior to publishing for accuracy of content and method.

For freewheeling, thought provoking, interactive discussion and debate, it's the right place.

We do have a peer review system for journal articles, although it's more on the line of what academic history journals use vice the scientific ones. Having had a couple of things published in the academic line (history), I can say that our process is at least as good as the one I dealt with. Not saying we can't always get better, mind, but I also didn't want folks to think that we don't have a peer review process in place.

[William F. Owen]

First,

Nothing but props for SWJ - performs a valuable service very, very, well.

Calling it a model the future of academic publishing is a stretch - unless we put some real rigorous peer review standards in place beyond the current forums. The key with academic journals is that submissions get reviewed by vetted experts in the field prior to publishing for accuracy of content and method.

For freewheeling, thought provoking, interactive discussion and debate, it's the right place.

Could not agree more strongly. I find SWJ a constant source of inspiration and the gold standard of informed scepticism to run ideas around in. Most of the progress my thinking has made in the last year is directly attributable to SWJ.

...but it's not the equivalent, or substitute for a peer reviewed academic or professional journal, and should not be regarded as such.

SWJ is the mule I took on 27 campaigns, not the fine horse I ride in parades to impress chicks.

[Van]

Right now, I'm working on a historical perspective and qualitative discussion of forecasting outcomes for a bunch of computer folks. I'm citing SWC as an example of the emerging model of decentralized, collaborative approaches to anticipating outcomes. The speed and adaptiblity of this framework (with the right participants) is mind-boggling.

[Steve Blair]

I also think it's important to remember the distinction between the actual Journal and the Council. The forum itself is pretty freewheeling (less than many, but better than some), and that's where reaction to articles often surfaces. The Journal itself is something different, as is the blog. They do form a united whole, but you need to remember the different aspects of each part of that whole.

[William F. Owen]

I also think it's important to remember the distinction between the actual Journal and the Council. The forum itself is pretty freewheeling (less than many, but better than some), and that's where reaction to articles often surfaces. The Journal itself is something different, as is the blog. They do form a united whole, but you need to remember the different aspects of each part of that whole.

Concur. In that regard, my previous comments were perhaps unfair. I still the "whole" is a wonderful thing.

[Rob Thornton]

Rex may have hit the bottom line to some degree with


"At the moment, they usually count for somewhere between "very little" and "nothing" for salary and promotion purposes."

However, does that risk being relevant to only a contained community? Its not just academics, it could be any community that has perhaps intentionally or unitentionally isolated itself.

Best, Rob

[Entropy]

Rex may have hit the bottom line to some degree with



However, does that risk being relevant to only a contained community? Its not just academics, it could be any community that has perhaps intentionally or unitentionally isolated itself.

Best, Rob

Just look at journalism, which scoffed and laughed at blogs and the online community. I agree with Rex for the here-and-now, but my sense is that academia is going to change, whether it wants to or not.

[marct]

Just look at journalism, which scoffed and laughed at blogs and the online community. I agree with Rex for the here-and-now, but my sense is that academia is going to change, whether it wants to or not.

Academia, as with all dinosaurs, is changing, just slowly. A lot of the reason, I suspect, why blogs are not de rigeur with academia is that it is relatively hard to place specific status on them.

[selil]

Academia, as with all dinosaurs, is changing, just slowly. A lot of the reason, I suspect, why blogs are not de rigeur with academia is that it is relatively hard to place specific status on them.

My University this year invested in a Wordpress blog server (not-insubstantial) and we stumbled across some intellectual property issues. After that I think blogging will become more mainstream. They really want to figure out what it means and are coming around. The door opening came not from the academic units but from the public relations people.

[marct]

Well, here was an interesting post over at open anthropology (http://openanthropology.wordpress.com/2008/09/23/a-world-upside-down-institutional-connections-of-anthropology-bloggers/) on Anthropology blogs in Canada. One of the things that comes out n the comments is the role of the blog - personal, w/academic hat on; or "academic".

At my university, I am the only Anthropologist blogging as an Anthropologist. My Dean blogs on the university server, but I have a suspicion that it is solely in the role of floating ideas before implementing policies (okay, I'm suspicious ;)). No one else in my Institute blogs, although I really wish they would (some truly amazing work being done there!). But, currently, here is no recognition of blogging as "real" academic work.

[jcustis]

Let's not forget that the SWC underwent a not so insignificant realignment a while back that brought it to the degree of detail that it offers now. SWCADMIN likes to refer to the content as "containers" on occasion. He realized that those containers had to change a bit, and we arguably saw a broadening of membership and discussion participants as a result.

I think the mods spent a considerable amount of time shifting threads, both old and new, in the ensuing months. Everyone caught on very quickly and I don't think I've heard a comment bout layout or flow in quite a while.

[PhilR]

I think that the SWJ site (the collective whole of the Journal, Blog, Discussion Forum and reference areas) is a good way to actually structure a matrixed and dispersed (maybe virtual) organization.
In the military, there is a plethora of "Centers of Excellence" being created. Beyond the usual jokes about the name, the attempt is being made to gather the threads of some critical warfighting mission, capability, aspect, etc. and create a focal point to facilitate organizing the knowledge in hopes of better dissemination (education and training) and being the advocate for new/better ideas and systems.
I've heard a couple of business presentations and one thing that sticks out is the contention that it is easier to organize around the software than to make the software adapt to a pre-determined organization. I think that the SWJ site could be a model for similar official sites to provide a focal point to discuss and assist in knowledge dissemination, etc. Sort of like what COEs are attempting to do.
As to blogging specifically, as a planner (experience at MEF, JTF, MNF-I and Fleet levels), I think that the discussion board and blog are a great model for managing deliberate planning efforts. Current Ops folks use chat rooms to coordinate in real time. Planners, especially at the higher echelons, don't need that immediate real time response, but need to handle and track multiple issues over the course of time. I could easily see an effort involving multiple HQs organzing the planning around a discussion board type organization.
The problem I have had in trying to implement this is that the military is more comfortable in trying to use email for this purpose, or to just post things in folders on websites. I think this idea will take off more as the younger generation who are growing up with it "come of age" into the field grade ranks (if they choose to stay past Captain).

[ericmwalters]

PhilR--
I've just GOT to get you involved with the Lejeune Leadership Institute because we use BlackBoard as the collaborative medium. Right now, most people use the discussion threads (much like the ones here, but not as aesthetically pleasing!), but there's blogs, announcements, and WIKIS!!!! (the latter I REALLY for batting around definitions, publication paragraphs/pages, etc).

Have to agree with everything you say--I'm just looking for a model to show people. I'm even feeling cramped in SWJ--why don't we have podcast capability? Now there's an idea...I'd like to get my journal mag in podcast form (that's how I get my wargame news already--on the computer or on my iPod when working out)...there's five wargamer podcasts I listen to...

[selil]

I use a variety of tools from WebCT/Blackboard to SharePoint and Citrix.

I'm all for podcasting if four people would commit to just 8 weeks once a week I'd produce it.

[SWJED]

... we are all ears. SWJ / SWC has plans and we need to hear ways to improve.

[Adam L]

No one else in my Institute blogs, although I really wish they would (some truly amazing work being done there!). But, currently, here is no recognition of blogging as "real" academic work.

Does it matter if it is "academic work" of any kind? The forum is a great place to test and refine ideas. It's a good place to spit ball concepts with a group of people whose backgrounds are extremely varied. I think the media and academia are seeing these new online formats for discussion as something far more alien than they are. SWJ is merely a technologically enchanced discussion group, coffee house or bar. We need to stop being so concerned with form rather than substance.

My point is that whether it is, "- personal, w/academic hat on; or "academic", is not relevent.

Adam L

[Note: When I refer to SWJ I am refering to the discussion board and the blog rather than the magazine.]

[selil]

Does it matter if it is "academic work" of any kind? The forum is a great place to test and refine ideas. It's a good place to spit ball concepts with a group of people whose backgrounds are extremely varied. I think the media and academia are seeing these new online formats for discussion as something far more alien than they are. SWJ is merely a technologically enchanced discussion group, coffee house or bar. We need to stop being so concerned with form rather than substance.

My point is that whether it is, "- personal, w/academic hat on; or "academic", is not relevent.

It may not be critical to be considered of academic value to everybody, but as a body SWJ/C has always reached out to a larger audience and to those who are academics it can be overtly, extremely, limiting, but critical the value of the information and how it is considered in academia.

A view into the world of academia and how an institution might consider blogging and web forum participation.

1) A dilution of academic time toward trivial pursuits
2) Possible exposure of University intellectual property (every thing I do)
3) Violations of internal and external disclousure agreements for grants and contracts
4) Exposure of intellectual capital in competitive grants processes
5) Diminution of the academic enterprise
6) Fraternization
7) Exposure to censure for unprofessional conduct
8) Lack of focus or taking the academic pursuit seriously

Those outside of academia may not recognize the above as issues but just about any junior academic in a research or state University is going to have heard them. Though those who may be affiliated with military programs or established military Universities likely have an edge those of us who have anti-military or peace activists on campus take a real chance even participating.

I am a technologist and I have a couple really good papers on technology mediated communication for education. I have presented web 2.0 and web 3.0 to the entire faculty and facilitated several programs brining that type of collaboration to their organization. My penchant for web forums is ignored if not formally recognized.

There were some pretty severe fights up to and including me going to the University Relations Vice Chancellor and explaining my position. I have a formal agreement in place that allows me to participate on web forums and blog (required to shut down my new boss). That gives you an idea of how serious they take this stuff. Now a lot of faculty blog with no agreements. For all of the above reasons they can only claim academic freedom for so long.

What does my blog and participation on web forums mean?

1) My ability to cognitively address issues and make them applicable is greatly enhanced
2) My world views are polished by the abrasion of reality daily
3) I filled have my available grad student slots in one day based on my blog
4) My writing is getting better as I am able to narrate rather than dictate as academics so willfully do
5) I might expect a couple hundred readers of a journal or conference proceeding. I get thousands of a blog entry in days. That is "idea" real estate
6) When i post on a web forum I might be talking to a high school student or a multiple PhD that kind of audience is almost impossible to generate

There are a lot of good reason to participate but it likely comes at a cost for us academics. Some may say "so what", but it can be as severe as not getting the next job or worse celebrating "pass over" as a major. All of trying to use the Internet as the engine of collaboration that it was originally designed to facilitate.

[richyoung87]

I've read this blog with interest because I've been tasked to develop an IW education pgm for the Joint Special Operations University at USSOCOM. Our primary audience will be our SOF Community (Operators / Staff / Enablers), but we also must include the spectrum of IW actors to make this thing worthwhile and holistic (IA, Academia, NGO, IO, Multinational, Business, etc...). As a former instructor at West Point and CGSC, I understand the value of brick & mortar classes...but...we're in an age where technology and OPTEMPO requires us to have persistent education through the internet (IMO)(online classes, portals for info / issues updates, blogs, wikipedias, etc). My going in idea is to :

1) Create dynamic brick and mortar courses that combine progressive adult learning techniques, use of internet resources, films-documentaries, subject matter experts to facilitate maximum learning (JSOU's format is usually 1 & 2 week courses), panels, debates, etc...

2) Dedicate a portion of the in-class and out-of-class design to teach students how to learn in this current educational/technological environment (Improving memory techniques, speed reading, critical thinking, internet research skills, etc...) With only a week or two, we can only scratch the surface of the intracacies of IW subjects - important to guide students and enable them for self-learning due to optempo issues and preference (younger students are learning more on their own nowadays)

3) TOUGH ONE: Provide students a concise reach-back, online resource so they can continue to learn after the brick & mortar class. As mentioned in this blog, there are tons of IW Ctrs of Excellence, programs and projects in and out of DOD and internationally - you all know what I'm talking about. I literally run across a new program, website, DOD project every day that needs to be included in our effort. The SWJ definitely will be an integral resource ...but...how do we manage these random "1000 Points of Educational Light" to give our students a focused reachback point of continued learning?

I sent out an email request two weeks ago to mainly the (US) Prof Military Education folks for assistance in starting yet another IW Educational COI: sharing ideas, curriculums, briefs, articles, etc... I've received good responses so I know there's an interest in supporting this initiative.

My question or request from the SWJ community is to provide suggestions in the best way to create and maintain this focused, IW learning portal. Going in position is "Don't care who gets credit for this - would love to have a consortium of sponsors / participants all considered equals in this endeavor. I'll be working with folks like JFCOM, Services, DOS, USAID, Brits, Canadians, Aussies, IA (SOCOM has LNOs within most major interagency orgs now), pvt security firms, select NGOs, and the UN for starters.

If anyone knows someone who is conducting research in this area (Modern Collaboration Techniques), please let me know.

[B]I'm also looking for participants that have Subject Matter Expertise in the IW areas listed in the IW JOC (Insurgency/COIN, Terrorism/CT, Unconventional Warfare, Foreign Internal Defense, Stability and Support Operations, and "Understanding People" + the other areas to:
1) Join the cause
2) Provide access to their materials for the IW educational community
3) Be willing to be a guest instructor
4) Be willing to keep the community updated in their particular areas of expertise

If interested, please contact me via PM for additional details

De Oppresso Liber!

[selil]

Yes I have been involved with "modern collaboration techniques". I am NOT a military instructor though and I may be missing elements of your culture. Go to my blog and look up the category scholarship of teaching and learning. I've got a few academic papers published on Web 2.0 tools for learning, and curriculum topics. To say as specific as your previous statements, the universe of the implications is vast, well is a simplification.

[Entropy]

ISTM a lot will depend on what classification(s) you plan for your portal.

As for the format, I would seriously consider the wiki model for a few reasons:

1. As an established, standardized tool, almost everyone understands it. One of my biggest complaints about DoD "portals" of all kinds is that they are all different and many are poorly designed and confusing to navigate. A known standard interface and simplicity should be a priority.

2. Allows for collaboration among all your stakeholders.

[Mike Innes]

Not sure how active this thread is any more, but I thought I'd add my two cents worth anyway. A couple of the posters have suggested that it might be a stretch to consider the SWJ community of platforms a model for future academic work. Rex rightly points out that at least for academics, blogging, forum moderation, etc., count for next to nothing towards the ticket punching that needs to be done for academics to progress.

Where this sort of thing can be better sold to academia is it's value as an extended seminar or workshop platform, a way of extending influence into the public domain, as "conversation" and "discussion" rather than as "publication". I think where some new media can easily fail is in trying to function as an alternative to peer-reviewed publication, or trying to replicate it in accelerated form, or trying to revolutionize how peer-review is done.

Why compete? Blogs, discussion fora, online magazines, all offer opportunities to extend debate and enable new and non-traditional voices to be heard - many of them non-academic practitioners with plenty to say. The can also enable academics, who might never be read or hear by any but their own narrow realm of academic peers, to become members of broader communities of interests, to have their work and ideas introduced to previously estranged communities.

If the management side of things remains focused, and keeps the content focused - as with SWJ/SWC - then the model works, and can be applied in innovative ways.

[Ratzel]

I always viewed SWJ (and the forum) as a place for practitioners of war, and those concerned with war, to trade ideas for use in combat. I'm interested in knowing if anyone learned anything here that benefited them and/or their units in combat? This would be a good survey question. Does this forum have that feature?

[marct]

Hi Mike,


A couple of the posters have suggested that it might be a stretch to consider the SWJ community of platforms a model for future academic work. Rex rightly points out that at least for academics, blogging, forum moderation, etc., count for next to nothing towards the ticket punching that needs to be done for academics to progress.

It's an interesting question / problem set, Mike. I think it is made even more interesting by the shifts that are happening, partly as a result of the new communications technologies, in the very definition and meaning of "academic". For example, one of the major changes that I see happening is a revitalization of the older, "independent scholar" type of academic who may be affiliated with a university (or research unit), but whose career is not controlled by them.

And, just as a note, in my department, blogging does count for academic credit in the tenure system, albeit not for very much.


I think where some new media can easily fail is in trying to function as an alternative to peer-reviewed publication, or trying to replicate it in accelerated form, or trying to revolutionize how peer-review is done.

Hmmm. Back in 1996, I had the chance to sit down with a guy who used to be the main editor of the American Journal of Sociology and talk about this. One of the points he noted, and he had been involved in peer review and editing for about 40 years, was that editing had pretty much disappeared in most journals while peer review tended to be more about theoretical correctness than any type of scientific assessment of the merits of an article. His point was that the heavy pressure to publish when combined with the huge increase in numbers of academics and increasing specialization was what led to this sorry state.

Personally, I see the development of online, hmmm, let's call them "practitioner communities", can serve as an excellent model of where scholarly research could go (if not "academic" research). Over the past 40 years or so, the pressure to use theoretical models, rather than fieldwork and data, has increased (one of those cost issues), so a lot of social science work has been based on "data" that is increasingly divorced from the field actually being studied. Forums such as the SWJ/SWC and the CTLab (:D) act as a work-around putting practitioners and scholars back in contact with each other.


Why compete? Blogs, discussion fora, online magazines, all offer opportunities to extend debate and enable new and non-traditional voices to be heard - many of them non-academic practitioners with plenty to say. The can also enable academics, who might never be read or hear by any but their own narrow realm of academic peers, to become members of broader communities of interests, to have their work and ideas introduced to previously estranged communities.

If the management side of things remains focused, and keeps the content focused - as with SWJ/SWC - then the model works, and can be applied in innovative ways.

I think this gets to the divide I was implying between "scholars" and "academics". Academics are, to some degree, locked into an academic career system based out of universities, while scholars are not necessarily so restricted.


I always viewed SWJ (and the forum) as a place for practitioners of war, and those concerned with war, to trade ideas for use in combat. I'm interested in knowing if anyone learned anything here that benefited them and/or their units in combat? This would be a good survey question. Does this forum have that feature?

Hi Ratzel, yes, we can run single question surveys. You would need to start a new thread to do so. Under the "Additional Options" at the bottom, there is a check box marked "Post a Poll". That will generate a multiple choice (max of 10 options) poll question. If you want to run a survey with more questions, shoot me a PM and I can toss one together on my own site and link it through for you.

Cheers,

Marc

[John T. Fishel]

of a peer reviewd journal, I can tell you that in more cases than we care to admit, peer review is less than it seems. I notice that Military Review is now advertizing itself as a peer reviewed journal.;)

I don't really know how my department/school at OU sees online publication and blogging since I am not now and don't want to be tenure track. That said, they are full of praise for my online publications and have gone out of the way to publicise them. I also note that a number of academic journals are, in fact, moving to online publication -either as the sole mode or in combination with traditional print. This brings up an interesting practical question: How do we preserve for posterity publications that only exist in the ether? I know, you can't really get rid of electrons and you could archive them electronically. But the reality is that if there is no hard copy, researchers may well have a nearly impossible time finding a document.

Cheers

JohnT

[selil]

How do we preserve for posterity publications that only exist in the ether? I know, you can't really get rid of electrons and you could archive them electronically. But the reality is that if there is no hard copy, researchers may well have a nearly impossible time finding a document.


I suggested at a library sciences meeting (they actually respect information technology people), that we needed a knowledge program.

Every scientific journal that receives an ISBN should have at least ten archival copies printed and ten national libraries would then accept them as hard copies, microfilm, and long term digital storage.

That would result in multiple methods of storage for long term. The Internet is a communication mechanism not a storage tool. People forget that for some reason.

[John T. Fishel]

will anyone bite?:cool:

Way to go, Sam.

Cheers

JohnT

[Bill Moore]

Sam,

I like your proposal, but it sounds like quite an undertaking. For those who are vetted academia it may be easier to develop business rules where they submit their documents to a university librarian knowledge manager, but what about the wealth of of other knowledge out there in e-article type format (for lack of a better word)? I imagine we have the same challenge with on-line magazines as we do with on-line studies and books.

Correct if I'm wrong, but I heard e-archiving isn't exactly easy either. One of the things I read was that the older e-documents can't be accessed by newer forms or versions of software (the pace of software evolution has appeared to slow, but I imagine over time it will still be an issue). The medium you store on whether is a server, floppy disk, CD, etc. is subject to corruption/damage. Finally, I "heard" that electronic media is not stable over long time periods?

That's why I'm espeically fond of your 10 hard copy suggestion :).

[selil]

Correct if I'm wrong, but I heard e-archiving isn't exactly easy either. One of the things I read was that the older e-documents can't be accessed by newer forms or versions of software (the pace of software evolution has appeared to slow, but I imagine over time it will still be an issue). The medium you store on whether is a server, floppy disk, CD, etc. is subject to corruption/damage. Finally, I "heard" that electronic media is not stable over long time periods?

That's why I'm espeically fond of your 10 hard copy suggestion :).

From the people I've talked to they say you are absolutely correct. Entire electronic libraries have become unusable due to proprietary formats and systems. Updates can make systems incompatible or corrupt storage mediums.

Certain types of storage medium are effected by the magnetic field of the earth. Optical storage media can be subject to "rot". There are lots of solutions, but even the library of congress has changed it's mind several time about archival methods.

There is the "way back machine" or the "internet archive" but it has trouble keeping pace with the storage requirements.

[jmm99]

similar to Library of Congress for works which are formally registered.

I don't know whether SWJ is formally registered - it is copyrighted (http://smallwarsjournal.com/site/terms/).

Anyway, submission of materials from any electronic media should be trivial - and, if its survival is the only question, should be relatively cheap. Sam can answer the technical questions as to how that could be best done - since he is our "smarts" in that area. :D

In a sense, Google Books is attempting something of the same for hardcopy. But, that is an expensive scan process.

In essence, what I would like as a end result would be a Google search which would be permanent - no dead links.

Hey Sam, now we know what you and I can do when we grow up - But, where do we get the few billion needed to initiate the project. I know !!! - Al Gore - it worked for Google :)

[Ratzel]

Hi Ratzel, yes, we can run single question surveys. You would need to start a new thread to do so. Under the "Additional Options" at the bottom, there is a check box marked "Post a Poll". That will generate a multiple choice (max of 10 options) poll question. If you want to run a survey with more questions, shoot me a PM and I can toss one together on my own site and link it through for you.

Thank you, I need to think about how I'd word the question[s]? I should be back soon?

[Umar Al-Mokhtār]

from an older thread on think tanks: "There are far more informed opinions, thoughts, and better analysis on here [SWJ] than the paid guns at Brookings, AEI, the Heritage Foundation, or the Council on Foreign Relations--most of whom have never engaged in actual foreign relations other than as a pundit, academic, or a student." While the quote was aimed at a different group of "thinkers" I think it also pertains to academia in general per this thread.

Marct responded to Tom with: "people here have much less "awe" of academic credentials and are more than happy to tell us ivory tower types that we are nuts ; people here tend to prefer experiential knowledge to academic knowledge - the pragmatic over the theoretical - so any theoretical plan or position gets vetted by pragmatists, not the other way around."

Which is also spot on. We blogospherites have not been properly "vetted" by the lofty academians and I feel we are thus held in very low esteem by those with larger brains and more parchment on their walls. :D

[William F. Owen]

We blogospherites have not been properly "vetted" by the lofty academians and I feel we are thus held in very low esteem by those with larger brains and more parchment on their walls. :D

I think some blogospherites should hold themselves in low esteem. The vast majority of what is written about military affairs on the internet is utter garbage. SWC is an exception because it holds people to rigour.

RIGOUR is what is mostly lacking. Lack of rigour gave us EBO, MW 4GW and a whole raft of other shaky strategic and military thought.

Having said that, there are very few academics in this area, I pay any attention to either. If you read some the PhDs that get handed out, or the work/papers that get cited as "insightful" the future is not bright.

It amazes me when folks, at conferences, come up to me and ask "where were you," as if having an MsC or PhD has anything to do with the credibility of my work.

[John T. Fishel]

with Academia, but neither are the practitioners innocents. After all, it was Colonel T. X, Hammes who popularized 4GW!!!!:eek: (Obviously, I agree with Wilf that that is not the best of terms...)

But, having said that, Academia is a market and, like all markets, is self-correcting over time. I find that my current academic affiliation, the U of OK, is a place of really insightful collegues who seem to appreciate the experience of practitioners as much as the theories of academicians. Of course, there are some old (and not so old) foolish Marxists who have never realized that the communists lost the Cold War and others caught up in gender studies nonsense. But overall, the trend is toward looking at the real world as it is - at least in the School of International and Area Studies. Similarly, I just saw a new program at my alma mater, Dartmouth College (home of our current and future - if taxes don't get him -Sec Treas), that is aimed at bringing classical education and rigor back in.

The point of this semi-rant is that there are good thinkers in both academia and in the real world. And, while PhDs in PC BS do still abound there are many PhDs in highly relevant subjects and granted to people with practitioner experience - not that that is any guarantee of real smarts:rolleyes:

Cheers

JohnT

[Rex Brynen]

...others caught up in gender studies nonsense.

Having taught gender and development myself, I would warn about using too large a brush here. My students have gone on to work (in the field, either as practitioners, or researchers, or both) on rape in refugee camps, child soldiers, the disarmament/demobilization of female ex-combatants, and sex-selective killing in genocides—among other things.

It doesn't get much more important or real-world than that.

(And yes John, I realize it was only meant as a casual aside. However, I'm damn proud of what some of them have gone on to do!)

Now back to your regularly-scheduled thread ;)

[Steve Blair]

The point of this semi-rant is that there are good thinkers in both academia and in the real world. And, while PhDs in PC BS do still abound there are many PhDs in highly relevant subjects and granted to people with practitioner experience - not that that is any guarantee of real smarts:rolleyes:

Cheers

JohnT

Spot on, John. While not every academic knows what he or she is talking about, I've met my share of practitioners who would be best served by keeping their mouths shut. At the end of the day it all comes down to the individual. A credential or service is no guarantee (or even indicator, IMO) of actual intelligence or capability to innovate. (and thus ends my own rant....:D)

[John T. Fishel]

I have no quarrel with the issue of differential impact of war, custom, and law on the two sexes. That is very, often very unfortunately, real. But I do object to the notion that there ought to be a separate field called "gender" studies. From where I sit, "gender" refers to the nature of words and endings in language - men and women are not different genders, they are different sexes.

Are men and women treated differently by different cultures and by the products of those cultures - war, development, etc? Of course! I recall doing my doctoral research in a Peruvian mountain village where the males had acculturated to the national Peruvian standard at a much faster rate than the females. All the men of the village had adopted either Western dress partially or entirely and all spoke decent Spanish. Hardly and of the women dressed in Western styles even partially. Moreover, very few of the women spoke any Spanish at all. Women were clearly subordinate in that subculture but it was clearly something that was in the process of changing. The development activities of the government, aided by female US Peace Corps volunteers, was deliberately accelerating the changes in ways that would promote significantly greater equality between the sexes. Is this "gender studies"? I don't think so. It is the study of development through a process that involved culture change. I was and remain proud of the PCVs and the local women who took leadership roles in making this happen. And, you have every right to feel pride in your students, as we all should. But let's not muddy the real issues by some (of what I would consider) phony pseudo academic discipline.

Cheers

JohnT

[Rex Brynen]

I have no quarrel with the issue of differential impact of war, custom, and law on the two sexes. That is very, often very unfortunately, real. But I do object to the notion that there ought to be a separate field called "gender" studies. From where I sit, "gender" refers to the nature of words and endings in language - men and women are not different genders, they are different sexes.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this. I think there is value in the interdisciplinary field when it is done well (which, as with all trendy academic topics, it often isn't). I also think the concept of gender (rather than biological) has considerable value in signaling the extent gender roles are cultural constructs and not some immutable function of biology.

[John T. Fishel]

mankind invented culture; mankind can change it:)

We clearly disagree on the less important things and agree on the ones I think are more important.

Cheers

JohnT

BTW that is the only thing he said in the course that I remember...

[marct]

You know, John, I've got to agree with Rex on this one; at least as far as the value of conceptually separating gender and sex are concerned. I also agree with Rex's caveat about interdisciplinary fields but, then, I'm biased - I teach in an Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies that has a Sexuality Studies minor :D!

As to whether or not "mankind invented culture; mankind can change it:)", I've got my doubts about that! (I know, heresy from a symbolic anthropologist!).

Back to the regularly scheduled discussion...

I've been involved in a lively set of exchanges on my blog, many of which center around the use of "anonymous" sources in journalism, anthropology, online communities and blogs. I've got a rough and ready way of weighting them, but I'd be interested in what other people think.

[Mike Innes]

Hi Marc. I lost track of this thread and had to dig around for it...


It's an interesting question / problem set, Mike. I think it is made even more interesting by the shifts that are happening, partly as a result of the new communications technologies, in the very definition and meaning of "academic". For example, one of the major changes that I see happening is a revitalization of the older, "independent scholar" type of academic who may be affiliated with a university (or research unit), but whose career is not controlled by them.

I agree, technology is definitely morphing the dialogue and building bridges in all sorts of ways - SWC involvement in the new Foreign Policy being a pretty strong case in point.

Re. independent scholars, I see that too - or at least, I see the benefit of it, from a personal viewpoint. I'm a full time practitioner with several such affiliations, and they allow me to at least participate on the periphery of academia. It's an interesting position to be in (though pecking order atmospherics can get a bit weird, like in the dept. where I'm actually working on a PhD :D ).

Rex's earlier comment about his students' accomplishments is a good one, too: academics are practitioners, some practitioners are heavy-hitting scholars, some practitioners have a wealth of first-hand knowledge and experience to share, and between the three there's a useful synthesis that's available, if we're able to spot it when it happens (or wily enough to engineer it :wry:).


And, just as a note, in my department, blogging does count for academic credit in the tenure system, albeit not for very much.

Do tell. I've never heard of the before. How progressive is Carleton? I wonder how prevalent that is? In developing CTlab, I polled quite a few academics on their view of blogging. Interesting, some junior academics seem terrified of the idea, lest they jeopardize their professional trajectories by doing something as flakey as (gasp!) blogging. Dan Drezner's case (denied tenure at Chicago, some say because of his blogging) was cited more than once (though now his success seems to moot the rest of it). Older, established academics seemed to love the idea as a more effective way of engaging the public more broadly. And then, of course, there are the independent souls who couldn't give a rat's ass about establishment expectations, and do it anyway, under a pseudonym or their own names. Bless'em.


Hmmm. Back in 1996, I had the chance to sit down with a guy who used to be the main editor of the American Journal of Sociology and talk about this. One of the points he noted, and he had been involved in peer review and editing for about 40 years, was that editing had pretty much disappeared in most journals while peer review tended to be more about theoretical correctness than any type of scientific assessment of the merits of an article. His point was that the heavy pressure to publish when combined with the huge increase in numbers of academics and increasing specialization was what led to this sorry state.

Fair point, and it rings true. Again, when I was first getting into blogging (not so long ago), and scanning around the web for some insight on how a professional might, errr, blog responsibly, ie. in a way that complements professional activities and standards without betraying the nature of the medium, I came across Research Blogging (http://researchblogging.org/). It has a pretty interesting approach to things: research blogging, for that community's purposes, is only "research blogging" if 1) the blogger is appropriately credentialed, and 2) is blogging about peer reviewed research. At the time, the Research Blogging community was still sorting out how it wanted to do things, but the big debate, as you might expect, was how to set the parameters of "peer reviewed research". Conference papers? Published articles only? In any self proclaimed "peer reviewed" journal? Or only articles from journals of recognized standard/standing? What about the open source movement in some academic disciplines, and online-only publication outlets? The discussions got into the problems with peer review that both you and John Fishel mentioned. I'm not sure I entirely agree with Research Blogging's full set of criteria (http://researchblogging.org/static/index/page/help), but they set an interesting standard in quality control for blogging, and suggests something akin to what John, Sam, and Bill were getting at,too.


Personally, I see the development of online, hmmm, let's call them "practitioner communities", can serve as an excellent model of where scholarly research could go (if not "academic" research). Over the past 40 years or so, the pressure to use theoretical models, rather than fieldwork and data, has increased (one of those cost issues), so a lot of social science work has been based on "data" that is increasingly divorced from the field actually being studied. Forums such as the SWJ/SWC and the CTLab (:D) act as a work-around putting practitioners and scholars back in contact with each other.

"Work around" is an interesting way of putting it. Heh heh... I wouldn't put CTlab in the same league as SWJ/SWC (yet!), but both are definitely filling a gap and bridging communities. I'm really looking forward to what they'll evolve into (hint hint...).

[Surferbeetle]

From the blog Press Think (http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/2008/06/26/pdf.html)


Migration-which is easily sentimentalized by Americans—is a community trauma. Pulling up stakes and leaving a familiar place is hard. Within the news tribe some people don’t want to go. These are the newsroom curmudgeons, a reactionary group. Others are in denial still, or they are quietly drifting away from journalism. Many are being shed as the tribe contracts and its economy convulses. A few are admitting that it’s time to panic.

And like reluctant migrants everywhere, the people in the news tribe have to decide what to take with them, when to leave, where to land. They have to figure out what is essential to their way of life, and which parts were well adapted to the old world but may be unnecessary or a handicap in the new. They have to ask if what they know is portable. What life will be like across the digital sea is of course an unknown to the migrant. This creates an immediate crisis for the elders of the tribe, who have always known how to live.

[marct]

Hi Mike,


Do tell. I've never heard of the before. How progressive is Carleton? I wonder how prevalent that is?

Not much, really. Our Dean blogs, at least in the sense of using the technology. There just aren't that many of us who do blog... :wry:.


In developing CTlab, I polled quite a few academics on their view of blogging. Interesting, some junior academics seem terrified of the idea, lest they jeopardize their professional trajectories by doing something as flakey as (gasp!) blogging. Dan Drezner's case (denied tenure at Chicago, some say because of his blogging) was cited more than once (though now his success seems to moot the rest of it). Older, established academics seemed to love the idea as a more effective way of engaging the public more broadly. And then, of course, there are the independent souls who couldn't give a rat's ass about establishment expectations, and do it anyway, under a pseudonym or their own names. Bless'em.

I suspect I fall into the latter category :D. Honestly, I think a lot of it depends on why you are blogging. I do it mainly to try out ideas before I work them into papers and, occasionally, to vent or (hint, hint) promote CDs from my "other life (http://ottawabachchoir.ca/eng/media/recordings/recordings.htm)".

Seriously, though, I've been looking at the HTS quite a bit and the entire culture education thing. Blogging has given me a venue to think things through, have them critiqued, get into conversations with all sorts of people, etc. It has also been useful in terms of networking without having to lay out thousands of dollars to go off to conferences (I'd rather save that money for Choir tours!).


"Work around" is an interesting way of putting it. Heh heh... I wouldn't put CTlab in the same league as SWJ/SWC (yet!), but both are definitely filling a gap and bridging communities. I'm really looking forward to what they'll evolve into (hint hint...).

Yeah, hint taken :D.

[selil]

I've been blogging a long time (defined as dated activities spanning time) from the early 1990s when I posted monthly articles on my website (static, no comments, top rate technology of the time), up until today where I use a fairly standard tool.

Like Marct I usually post things that are thought papers, or ideas "in transit", or things I am trying to create mind share about (poisoning the well sort of), and stuff that just wouldn't be published in academic literature. Since my website/blog is part of my life it is not as single minded focused as other peoples. From cyber warfare, to theory , to archery, and building cars. What I'm interested in floats to the top. I'm not a prolific blogger, and I don't "resuscitate" (<- NOT A MISTAKE IN TERMINOLOGY) the main stream media.

Still my department leaders, and university does not understand the idea of blogging. Though they have decided to "let" me continue.

[SWJED]

What do Lady Gaga and Small Wars Journal have in common? One is on the cover of the Rolling Stone and one isn’t – but sure enough both made the Rolling Stone 2009 “Hot List” (http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/28455332/the_rolling_stone_2009_hot_list) – go figure.


Stocks may tumble and fortunes may fall, but hotness, it seems, is eternal.

There was some concern about compiling our latest Rolling Stone Hot List during an ice-cold era. But it seems that in these uncertain, gray days, we need what our Managing Editor Will Dana called "the sparkly and the sexy, the perfectly shaped diversions America leads the world in creating."

... Since we launched the Hot List in 1986, we've had our share of hits and misses (check our cover gallery to revisit all out past Hot Issues, from Angelina to Giselle to Britney). In 1988, we profiled "Hot Character Actor" Kevin Spacey, and we're particularly proud that in 1990, we introduced readers to a 23-year-old screenwriter named Jeffrey Abrams (you might know him now as Lost and Star Trek visionary J.J. Abrams). Of course, we've also missed the mark — in 1990, we thought Renny Harlin's hot streak would last, and the same issue that featured Abrams also declared Tevin Campbell "Hot Prodigy."

This time, we're banking on an assortment of movers, shakers and muckrakers that runs the gamut from the warfare digest "Small Wars Journal" to Hot Issue cover girl Lady Gaga…

Rolling Stone’s 2009 Hot List (http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/28455332/the_rolling_stone_2009_hot_list) - as soon as we grab a hard copy of RS we'll post the SWJ entry - anyone seen it yet and care to share below? This issue has not hit the news stands as yet.

[William F. Owen]

So does that mean we, the community are hot?

I know the Post modern COIN avant-garde want to be "hot" as any group pushing an agenda does, but I no longer see them here on SWJ?

What I see, and why I am still here 2 years later, is a mostly a bunch of hard nosed pragmatists, pretty un-interested in silly "new war" ideas or much of the silly language that goes with it.

In fact, I am far from the only Clausewitian here and you don't get less "hot" than CvC.

Happy being "cool" though. :D

[slapout9]

Wilf, it was the Conspiracy thread that did it....nobody noticed us before:D:D:D

[SWJED]

So does that mean we, the community are hot?
... Happy being "cool" though. :D

Of course "we" - as I said - go figure :wry:.

[Tom Odom]

So is Lady Gaga gonna join SWJ? Maybe host a non-virtual? :D

Maybe a centerfold in the Journal? :cool:

[Old Eagle]

First, I'm TIME's Person of the Year (The American Solsier) and now I make RS's Hot List. Gonna really round out my otherwise pedantic resume!:D

[Old Eagle]

Wonder if we can "get our picture on the cover of the Rolling Stone"!

OK so most of you are to young to remember that.

[Tom Odom]

Wonder if we can "get our picture on the cover of the Rolling Stone"!

OK so most of you are to young to remember that.

Oh wow man...Rock and Roll!


Well we are big rock singers, we've got golden fingers
And we're loved everywhere we go
We sing about beauty and we sing about truth
At ten thousand dollars a show
We take all kind of pills to give us all kind of thrills
But the thrill we've never known
Is the thrill that'll get you when you get your picture
On the cover of the Rolling Stone

I've got a freaky old lady name o' Cocaine Katy
Who embroiders on my jeans
I've got my poor old gray-haired Daddy
Drivin' my limousine
Now it's all designed to blow our minds
But our minds won't really be blown
Like the blow that'll get you when you get your picture
On the cover of the Rolling Stone

{Refrain}

We got a lot of little teenage blue-eyed groupies
Who do anything we say
We got a genuine Indian guru
He's teachin' us a better way
We got all the friends that money can buy
So we never have to be alone
And we keep gettin' richer but we can't get our picture
On the cover of the Rolling Stone


{Refrain}
Rolling Stone
Wanna see my picture on the cover
Rolling Stone
Wanna buy five copies for my mother
Rolling Stone
Wanna see my smilin' face
On the cover of the Rolling Stone

Dr. Hook and the Medicine Show

[John T. Fishel]

I didn't realize that I (we) was/were so "hot"/"cool".:cool:

Cheers

JohnT

[J Wolfsberger]

First, I'm TIME's Person of the Year (The American Solsier) and now I make RS's Hot List. Gonna really round out my otherwise pedantic resume!:D

A little guidance here. Exactly how to we enter this on our resumes? :confused:

[slapout9]

As Ken says for you young'ins Dr. Hook...Cover Of The Rolling Stone



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ux3-a9RE1Q

[George L. Singleton]

The Scottish Poet Robert (Bobby) Burns said it in plain simple English: "It takes no brains, no genius to criticize."


"Pedants will be able to cite exceptions, and thus undermine useful (insightful) theory. Their depredations must be firmly resisted by one simple test: does the theory generally aid understanding of useful military problems? If so, then exceptions are permissible."
J.P. Storr “Human Aspects of Command”

[William F. Owen]

The Scottish Poet Robert (Bobby) Burns said it in plain simple English: "It takes no brains, no genius to criticize."


"Pedants will be able to cite exceptions, and thus undermine useful (insightful) theory. Their depredations must be firmly resisted by one simple test: does the theory generally aid understanding of useful military problems? If so, then exceptions are permissible."
J.P. Storr “Human Aspects of Command”

OK. You have my attention. What are you trying to say?

[Rank amateur]

Should've banned amateurs when you had a chance. Now you're going to be owerrun with riff raff.

On a serious note, the most intelligent conversation on the net happens here.

[Umar Al-Mokhtār]

Wilf that's even better than "pop-centric COIN"! I can even picture a few of them sitting at a cafe wearing jaunty berets, sipping Absinthe and Pernod, and drawing on their delicately held Gauloises. ;)

Where did they go? Well, having stepped off into the limelight to now revel in their new pop stardome they seem to have left we of the pragmatic and weathered hoi-polloi to continue to march on.

[Tom Odom]

Wilf that's even better than "pop-centric COIN"! I can even picture a few of them sitting at a cafe wearing jaunty berets, sipping Absinthe and Pernod, and drawing on their delicately held Gauloises. ;)


Don't forget the safety belts, gotta have the safety belts :wry:

[Umar Al-Mokhtār]

I love it!

[slapout9]

Speaking of COINS the contest I won for the SWC coin motto...how many years ago??? Boots on the ground...Eyes on the People.....Mind on the Mission;)

Where is the COIN?? that is what should be on the cover of RS.

[MattC86]

A little guidance here. Exactly how to we enter this on our resumes? :confused:

One of my idiot friends put "Time's Person of the Year" under Awards and Distinctions, because Time's Person of the Year a couple years ago was "You" (Facebook, YouTube, etc.)

So a bunch of y'all can say you were person of the year TWICE and now are on RS' Hot List!

Matt

[William F. Owen]

Wilf that's even better than "pop-centric COIN"! I can even picture a few of them sitting at a cafe wearing jaunty berets, sipping Absinthe and Pernod, and drawing on their delicately held Gauloises. ;)

Where did they go? Well, having stepped off into the limelight to now revel in their new pop stardome they seem to have left we of the pragmatic and weathered hoi-polloi to continue to march on.

I'm not sure they ever existed or went anywhere! They might still be here! Some dinosaurs became birds. They mostly come at night... mostly

The men who made the US Army understand that war is not just formation level combat operations, against other formations, deserve praise and credit. They are cool.

The "War is changing" and "Clausewitz doesn't apply any more" are the folks I worry about.

[Steve Blair]

we still have to compete with this (http://www.rollingstone.com/photos/gallery/28419077/daisy_lowe_up_close_with_the_mode). And I, for one, ain't gonna even attempt it.

However, this (http://www.rollingstone.com/photos/gallery/28376545/the_2009_hot_list_the_rockers_mo/photo/9) could be something of an "in action" shot for the wild kingdom portion of the council....

[JMG1093]

It appears as a column on the right side of page 85 with a pic of Somali Pirates.

Hot Intelligence: 'Small Wars Journal'
The Military's New Must Read

Want to know how Obama is going to fight the war in Afghanistan? Then check out Small Wars Journal, an online magazine that provides a crash course on asymmetric warfare. Get schooled in fighting Somali pirates. Find out what Malcolm Nance, a former Navy interrogation instructor, thinks about waterboarding ("a torture technique, Period"). When David Kilcullen, special adviser to Gen. Petraeus, live-blogged the Iraq surge, he did it for SWJ.

Contributions include who's who of the sharpest minds in uniform, regardless of rank. "You're judged purely on the strength of your intellectual argument," says John Nagl, a retired lieutenant colonel who helped write the Army's Counterinsurgency Field Manual. Run by two former Marines, the site is a must-read for military insiders. "We must be doing something right," says co-founder Dave Dilegge, "because we get people calling us Attila the Hun warmongers one day and counterinsurgency-loving tree-huggers the next."

[Hacksaw]

what happened to the photo shoot of Ken and Tom in the speedos??:D

[Steve Blair]

what happened to the photo shoot of Ken and Tom in the speedos??:D

I think they were either banned or confiscated....:D

[Uboat509]

what happened to the photo shoot of Ken and Tom in the speedos??:D

I believe that they were banned under a number of non-proliferation treaties.

SFC W

[Hacksaw]

Just more examples of the "MAN" trying to keep Ken and Tom down

[SWJED]

It appears as a column on the right side of page 85 with a pic of Somali Pirates.

Hot Intelligence: 'Small Wars Journal'
The Military's New Must Read

Want to know how Obama is going to fight the war in Afghanistan? Then check out Small Wars Journal, an online magazine that provides a crash course on asymmetric warfare. Get schooled in fighting Somali pirates. Find out what Malcolm Nance, a former Navy interrogation instructor, thinks about waterboarding ("a torture technique, Period"). When David Kilcullen, special adviser to Gen. Petraeus, live-blogged the Iraq surge, he did it for SWJ.

Contributions include who's who of the sharpest minds in uniform, regardless of rank. "You're judged purely on the strength of your intellectual argument," says John Nagl, a retired lieutenant colonel who helped write the Army's Counterinsurgency Field Manual. Run by two former Marines, the site is a must-read for military insiders. "We must be doing something right," says co-founder Dave Dilegge, "because we get people calling us Attila the Hun warmongers one day and counterinsurgency-loving tree-huggers the next."

Thanks JMG - I was wondering what was said...

[Ken White]

I believe that they were banned under a number of non-proliferation treaties.Something about containment being inadequate. Sounded like discrimination to me but Tom said to just drop it so I did and they yanked the pics...

How was I to know what he meant...

[SWCAdmin]

Phil Spector jailed for 19 years (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8074685.stm).

Not sure about this new crowd we're running with. :o

[marct]

Something about containment being inadequate. Sounded like discrimination to me but Tom said to just drop it so I did and they yanked the pics...

You mean that's NOT Tom on the right :eek::D
http://i.realone.com/assets/rn/img/3/3/4/6/28376433-28376434-large.jpg

[Culpeper]

Excellent

[Ken White]

You mean that's NOT Tom on the right :eek::D
http://i.realone.com/assets/rn/img/3/3/4/6/28376433-28376434-large.jpgthe beaver? :D

[Beelzebubalicious]

Ouch. The next thing will be Matt Lauer breaking the news about this hot new forum...and then SWC will be overrun with knuckleheads. Might as well start a new category for the Mall Ninjas...

By the way, I consider myself fairly intelligent, but I can't understand half of what Marc T writes. Does everyone else understand him or am I just dumb?

[William F. Owen]

Ouch. The next thing will be Matt Lauer breaking the news about this hot new forum...and then SWC will be overrun with knuckleheads. Might as well start a new category for the Mall Ninjas...
Hey, it's how I got here!

By the way, I consider myself fairly intelligent, but I can't understand half of what Marc T writes. Does everyone else understand him or am I just dumb?
Damn man! Stop rocking the boat. I don't understand 50% of what I write and I don't think anyone else does either.

[Umar Al-Mokhtār]

don't be so hard on the Beaver! :D

[marct]

Ouch. The next thing will be Matt Lauer breaking the news about this hot new forum...and then SWC will be overrun with knuckleheads. Might as well start a new category for the Mall Ninjas...

I thought we had a thread for them already (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=375)?


By the way, I consider myself fairly intelligent, but I can't understand half of what Marc T writes. Does everyone else understand him or am I just dumb?

Well, I'd guess I understand about 60% of what I write ;). BTW, from what Rob (and my wife :eek:!) say, it's much worse in person :D!

[M Davis]

Ouch. The next thing will be Matt Lauer breaking the news about this hot new forum...and then SWC will be overrun with knuckleheads. Might as well start a new category for the Mall Ninjas...



As one of the new knuckleheads, I was wondering this myself. This is one of the few military-related forums I've found that didn't routinely devolve into "back in my day crabby crabby crabby" and "how can i get out of my contract..." I wonder how this place will weather the coming storm of "oh hay guys, I liek COIN too!"

[Old Eagle]

To date, we owe our professionalism to Dave, Bill and the moderators. So no, we're not "edgy", like some blogs. Contrary to some accusations, we do have some readers younger than 40, although I'm not one of them.

Keep up the good work, guys.

[jmm99]

from marct
Well, I'd guess I understand about 60% of what I write. BTW, from what Rob (and my wife !) say, it's much worse in person.

and now I have an explanation (subject to confirmation through intense historical research accompanied by pallets of high-test beer) for the outcome at the Windmill.

Your ancestor was designated PsyOps officer (with a voice of 10, nay 100 men) - and made his pitch to the Languedoc grenadiers. Not only did they not understand a word he said, his presentation put the rest of Murray's Highlanders to sleep. And, the rest is history as they say. :D

[marct]

Your ancestor was designated PsyOps officer (with a voice of 10, nay 100 men) - and made his pitch to the Languedoc grenadiers. Not only did they not understand a word he said, his presentation put the rest of Murray's Highlanders to sleep. And, the rest is history as they say. :D

Ah yes, that's when we (as a family) gave up the direct action (http://www.new-forest-national-park.com/rufus-stone.html) business :D! Now, I will have to note that the Murray Highlanders were under strict orders to put cotton wool in their ears before the assault, however... :cool:

[Ken White]

Highlanders, that is, re: The Murray Highlanders, it has been said to me that the cotton is likely overflow or outflow from the cranial cavity.

I didn't understand that but my Sassenach wife often says things I don't understand.. :eek: :confused:

[jmm99]

1. The Highlanders' ears were blocked - so they couldn't hear orders; and

2. They couldn't shoot straight (e.g. genetic input from Walter Tyrrell )

But, keep right on digging -- China is only a short distance to go.

On that day,
a mill in the pays,
Languedoc was hot,
Highlanders were not.

------------------------

Further Genealogical Notes on the Tyrrell-Terrell Family of Virginia (760kb), which is here (http://books.google.com/books?id=AVETAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA14&lpg=PA14&dq=Walter+Tyrrell+genealogy&source=bl&ots=TQGMY1sSwP&sig=VoQzIIED5jk9xRxNIuABK5-CWgA&hl=en&ei=3d4iSoeECY3cM__N2aUJ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#PPA1,M1).

What's more, the more I research this in dusty tomes (http://books.google.com/books?id=THwOAAAAYAAJ&pg=RA4-PA31&lpg=RA4-PA31&dq=windmill+highlanders+grenadiers&source=bl&ots=f_Xy5jNesM&sig=baPC6fNx3xuwUKoiTYlktO7YP8Y&hl=en&ei=A-QiSsS3PJLAM66ypbQJ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1), the odder things develop:


A carious hand to hand fight between the Highlanders and French Grenadiers took place on the 28th April, 1760, at Dumont's Mill, on the site adjoining Mr. Dunscomb's house, on the St. Foye Road.

"With this old windmill is associated one of the most thrilling episodes of the conflict. Some of the French Grenadiers and some of Fraser's Highlanders took, lost and re-took the Mill three times, their respective officers looking on in mute astonishment and admiration; whilst a Scotch piper, who had been under arrest for bad conduct, ever since the 13th Sept., 1759, was piping away within hearing ;—so says an old Chronicle— (Maple Leaves, 1873, p. 182)." [emphasis in original].

What - the worst sin of a Scottish regiment - to put wool in ears - and block out the sound of the regiment's piper. No wonder you lost after the third replay.

[Ken White]

What - the worst sin of a Scottish regiment - to put wool in ears - and block out the sound of the regiment's piper. No wonder you lost after the third replay.Served 'em right. Yon Frazer's ae bollocks everythin'

[BayonetBrant]

Contrary to some accusations, we do have some readers younger than 40

well... I'm one of them, but 40's getting closer every year, darnit... :o

[Umar Al-Mokhtār]

As Rolling Stone said "an assortment of movers, shakers and muckrakers" I'm wondering where the editoral staff placed SWJ of those three.

Maybe the answer lies with Steve Miller:

Some people call me the COIN cowboy, yeah
Some call me the guerilla of blog
Some people call me Dave D…
Cause I speak, of the positives of grog.

People talk about me, baby
Say I'm doin' it wrong, doin' it wrong
Well, don't you worry baby, don't worry
Cause I'm bloggin, bloggin, bloggin,
right here at home

Cause I'm a rebel
I’m insurgent
I’m a blogger
And a COINdinista

I run the Journal just for fun

I'm a mover
I'm a shaker
I'm a keen muckraker
Rolling Stone says I’m the one. Wooo Woooo :D

[Old Eagle]

Awesome!

or whatever the current terminology is.

[SWJED]

Too much Umar Al-Mokhtār :cool:

[Umar Al-Mokhtār]

I just seem to have skill sets that are both irrelevant and irreverent… :D

[Ken White]

I say...:D

[Umar Al-Mokhtār]

but also Dave, you can never have too much Umar Al-Mokhtār!

"I put the "grrrr" in swinger, baby! Yeah!" :p

[richyoung87]

Below is a post I submitted several months back - got some direct but mostly indirect responses - good info but not much to operationalize a concept....so....am asking for concrete ideas prior to our 1-2 Sep Initial Planning Conf for Project Starfish: Have funding and a sponsor (JFCOM JIWC & IWSP/TSWG) to start a collaborative Irregular Warfare Community of Interest focused on Education/Training first - web based. Idea is not to compete with existing COIs like SWJ, but to integrate efforts so the left hands working IW issues/education know what the right hands are doing (and POCs for both hands) We're not competing with Consortium of Complex Operations inititiave, but again - trying to complement and intergrate these efforts. If you haven't picked up on it, IW is the buzzword of the day in the QDR and all other DOD forums. Your suggestions to the questions below WILL get inputted into the mission analysis that will occur 1-2 Sep in Suffolf. Appreciate up front your time and concern for this venture. We owe our SOF and GPF + IA folks the best/cutting edge knowledge to stay ahead of the bad guys and drain their swamps!!! De Oppresso Liber!

"My question or request from the SWJ community is to provide suggestions in the best way to create and maintain this focused, IW learning portal. Going in position is "Don't care who gets credit for this - would love to have a consortium of sponsors / participants all considered equals in this endeavor. I'll be working with folks like JFCOM, Services, DOS, USAID, Brits, Canadians, Aussies, IA (SOCOM has LNOs within most major interagency orgs now), pvt security firms, select NGOs, and the UN for starters.

If anyone knows someone who is conducting research in this area (Modern Collaboration Techniques), please let me know.

I'm also looking for participants that have Subject Matter Expertise in the IW areas listed in the IW JOC (Insurgency/COIN, Terrorism/CT, Unconventional Warfare, Foreign Internal Defense, Stability and Support Operations, and "Understanding People" + the other areas to:
1) Join the cause
2) Provide access to their materials for the IW educational community
3) Be willing to be a guest instructor
4) Be willing to keep the community updated in their particular areas of expertise

If interested, please contact me via PM for additional details.

[selil]

"My question or request from the SWJ community is to provide suggestions in the best way to create and maintain this focused, IW learning portal. Going in position is "Don't care who gets credit for this - would love to have a consortium of sponsors / participants all considered equals in this endeavor. I'll be working with folks like JFCOM, Services, DOS, USAID, Brits, Canadians, Aussies, IA (SOCOM has LNOs within most major interagency orgs now), pvt security firms, select NGOs, and the UN for starters.

If anyone knows someone who is conducting research in this area (Modern Collaboration Techniques), please let me know.

Alrighty.

1) The tech is the easy part. I imagine you are using IW to mean irregular warfare. I am not an expert at that.

2) If you want to create a portal think about your goals. I've consulted on social media sites that generate 100K views a minute and have my own blog with (100 views a day). The difference is the community that has interest. You need to know intimately the community that you wish to engage.

3) You have a few posts here on SWJ/C and if you want a portal to grow you need to be involved. SWJ/C has grown because the owners are absolute maniacs in their involvement. SWJ/C is a jewel among social media sites because it reflects the progenitors excellence.

4) Design, design, design and know what you are building from content on up. Trying to combine technologies after the fact sux.

5) Stay away from "social media experts". They aren't and they won't.

Ask questions should you desire.

[davidbfpo]

In a Tom Ricks guest column 'The decay of the profession of arms' fulsome praise for SWC:
Up until now, the most vibrant professional debates have been almost exclusively hosted by privately run websites such as Small Wars Journal and Abu Muqawama.

Link:http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2014/01/08/the_decay_of_the_profession_of_arms#sthash.CfpHWFg E.t37SUW1I.dpuf

Note Abu M is no longer active.

The article is worth a read in total, although US Army-centric.

[davidbfpo]

Prompted by a "Digger's" comment (in a new thread) I have searched for similar thankyou messages and praise - hence three old, closed threads being merged today. I think there are more somewhere.

The title was SWJ model the future of academic literature; it will now become SWJ: praise given and reviews.

What the "Digger" wrote:
the original leader in the field of online commentary from experienced military voices and commentators. The Small Wars Journal continues to be a learning mecca for junior commanders.

[davidbfpo]

Found just a comment in 2009 by Professor David Betz, Kings War Studies:
The best and most established one-stop shop for insurgency related researchers and practitioners; part blog, part discussion forum, it also maintains an extensive library of links to other resources.
Link:http://internationalstudies.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.001.0001/acrefore-9780190846626-e-26?rskey=Doj3re&result=43