Alex's message to Julia reminded me of the original RMs versus archivists
discussion, which Julia characterized as having something to do with "doers"
versus "thinkers."  I jumped into that earlier this week, perhaps surprising some
of you.

I'm not a RM.  I joined the List in February at a time my agency was working
on a new records retention schedule, but never posted an introduction
explaining why I am here.  Sorry about that, that was inconsiderate of me.  Here's a
belated introduction which also explains why I will be posting articles such as
the one on Friday about the discussion about Kosovo records among DOD
historians.  (The one Steve said wasn't worth printing out, LOL).

Here's who I am and what you're likely to hear from me.  I started out my
career as an Archivist at the National Archives, working for 14 years with the
Nixon WH records.  Since 1990, I have  been a Federal historian (170 job series)
who deals on the job with governmental history.  I work for the Government
Accountability Office (GAO). I write at my agency both to meet internal business
needs but also to inform the public.

I'm one of those very lucky people whose job relates directly to my hobby,
which is reading about diplomatic, military, and political history. Few of you
are charged with doing what I do on the job but I bet many of you have similar
hobbies. So you can see how I depend on people such as you -- those who work
in the Federal area, either as permanent employees or contractors -- taking
action now to enable historians like me to work properly to serve my internal and
external clients in the future.  I also am looking to learn from you about
the challenges you face so I can advocate on your behalf.

Here's how my professional requirements intersect with my hobbies.   I'm
especially interested in reading about World War II but also about the Cold War
period and especially the Vietnam era.  Those were periods of paper based record
keeing. Times have changed, how will the move to electronic record keeping
affect future Federal historians and writers of public history?

The question of what we will read in the future about the Kosovo operations
is pertinent to those interested in reading or writing history because that
time period of the 1990s  coincided with changes in record keeping.  Believe me,
historians will not want to write histories of the Kosovo operations based
solely on press releases by the Clinton White House and DOD and stories published
back then in the New York Times and Washington Post.  They will want to go
into the records.  Was enough done then within DOD to preserve them?  What is
being done currently to maintain and preserve government records?

This is why I posted on Friday and will continue to post links to discussions
such as the one among military historians about Kosovo and articles by
advocates such as Air Force Historian Eduard Mark, etc.  These issues have not been
covered much on the List previously.  Yet they speak to key areas of Federal
record keeping.

Before I joined the List, I occasionally read it through its web archives.  I
noticed that the List had established certain areas of interest and
practices.  Rarely do the end users of the records speak up.  You see few postings from
".gov"  addresses.  I suspect many Feds lurk but don't post, that also is the
case with the Archives List.  I look at both Lists as being like conference
rooms where people gather in different corners of a large room, chatting about
what interests them.  The topics all relate  generally to the same area
(records, how they are created, maintained, preserved, and used).

I walk into the room, meet up with some people, and we discuss some topics
related to our profession and fields.  Others might walk by, overhear snatches
of our conversation, and walk to another area, thinking "boring."  But in no
way does our continued discussion interfere with their discussing in another
corner of the room what they are interested in.  And they are unlikely to stop in
the convention hall and say, "shut up, go away," or otherwise try to stop us
from talking.  Just as I would be unlikely to try to bully anyone into
silence. That's because I see no place in the conference room for dominance
hierarchies, the stuff that Professor Tannen studies and writes about.  It's just a
room where people gravitate to topics and individuals that draw them.

Same with the List, which I view as a virtual conference room.  Many of the
postings are short inquiries and responses, often relating to technical advice.
 That's a comfortable format for many of you, I understand that.  But the
fact that I've gotten a number of off List responses since I started posting in
February tells me that some people are interested in but perhaps hesitant to
post publicly about some issues.  And no, I'm not talking about anything
political.

I've even gotten some off List inquiries from newcomers to the field of
records management, asking me for advice, presumably from my perspective as a
former archivist and as an agency historian.  Or maybe just because I sound
approachable.  I'm sure you guys get off List messages asking for help, also. Maybe
different people approach different posters. Like you, I don't mind, I'm happy
to have those discussions, on or off List.  But they can only be triggered by
me posting initially to the List as a whole so people can find out what are my
areas of interest or expertise and what I'm looking to learn from you.

For those who aren't interested in my stuff -- some of them way too long, too
boring, too much thinking, not enough doing -- feel free to delete the
messages unread or even set up rules to auto trash 'em, you all are records managers
and technical wizards, should be easy to do, LOL.

For the U.S. citizens among you, happy Fourth of July, enjoy the holiday on
Monday.  To the rest of you, best regards and have a good weekend!

Maarja

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance