Top 5

[hinkled at dvcrf.com]

TOP FIVE REASONS I SUBSCRIBED TO THIS LIST:

5) Peer Pressure
4) The -still unsubstantiated- belief that my peer practitioners were
lurking on the list, and just not posting. Is anybody out there? P.S.
thanks to all those who have off-list e-mailed me their words of support
and encouragement (now get out of the closet!)
3) Bill Myers and the Alternatives CU
2) to trade news within the CDFI field
1) to learn from other peoples' practice and experience

TOP FIVE REASONS I UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST:

5) Micro Lending Threads
4) International Micro Lending Threads
3) the ratio of advocates and academics to practitioners
2) the lack of posts about practitioner learnings
1) the realization that I delete 99% of posts un-read based on them
containing the following key words in the re: (micro-lending,
international, peer lending, community ownership, grad student, research
request, call your congressman, press release).

>Yes, I too will be unsubscribing from the listserv
The real reasons are (a) that the list's SPAM ratio.......opps, let me
tone down my irreverence.........the number of posts that I do not find
revelant or helpful to my work, and (b) I will be on sabbatical from 7/9
to 10/11 and could not survive returning to 3,546 e-mails !!

Hopefully I will return from sabbatical a better motorcyclist, and
refreshed to take up my post as slayer of the uncompromising,
rose-colored-glasses, black and white,
can't-see-a-shade-of-gray-if-it-killed-them advocates and academics who
inspire us to tune out, sign-off and get back to the real world and our
hard work.

--
Donald R. Hinkle
Director, Community Resources Group
The Reinvestment Fund
718 Arch Street, Suite 300N
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Voice: 215-925-1130 x212
Fax: 215-923-4764




This post transferred from the cdb-l mailing list

[CarlaWeil at aol.com]

Top reason I might consider unsubscribing from the list: Don Hinkle will not
be posting for the next 3 -4 months.

Don, as a fellow "practitioner" I've been willing to let you essentially
espouse my viewpoint. I must say that I sometimes find myself feeling as
though I'm not "pure" enough to be in this business when reading some of the
more ideological posts. Each of us, however, has strengths and personality
proclivities which have taken us into different jobs and roles - all of
which I think are essential to the overall scheme. I am an idealogically
motivated pragmatist. Advocacy makes me uneasy and I don't have the attention
span or patience to do research. Still, without the advocates I know that I
wouldn't have access to many of the funds (notably those "inspired" by CRA)
with which I do what I do. WIthout the research I suppose the advocates
would be without needed ammunition (apologies for the militaristic analogy)
to accomplish their goals, etc, etc etc. So here's to more practitioner
input to round out the discussions.....

Carla Weil
Greater New Haven Community Loan Fund
171 Orange Street
New Haven, CT 06511
Voice: 203-789-8690
Fax: 203-865-6475


This post transferred from the cdb-l mailing list

[tadirector at juno.com]

Carla,

Well said!


Keith Ferrell
Technical Assistants
1315 Walnut Street, Suite 500
Philadelphia PA 19107
tadirector@juno.com

__________________________________________________ _________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.


This post transferred from the cdb-l mailing list

[cmahon at natfed.org]

As a practitioner myself, I felt Mr. Hinkle was part of the problem. And the
problem with many of the postings to this list is not, I believe, that they
are ideological. As practitioners, theoreticians, advocates, etc. I believe
we should challenge ourselves to consider and analyze our work as part of a
broader picture of change. How we define that change may differ and therein
lies some potentially interesting exchanges.

No, I have found the problem of recent postings to be one of individual
quarreling that is not particularly relevant nor seemingly well-informed.
And at times, as with some of Mr. Hinkle's postings actually offensive.

So as one of the 'silent' practitioners out here. I welcome postings that
place current challenges in the field in a broader social/political context.
However, I would ask for postings to include (where possible) references to
materials, articles, books where we could find additional information if we
choose to pursue it.






This post transferred from the cdb-l mailing list

[wec3 at cornell.edu]

See response below:

At 11:11 AM 6/10/99 -0400, Cathie Mahon wrote:
>No, I have found the problem of recent postings to be one of individual
>quarreling that is not particularly relevant nor seemingly well-informed.
>And at times, as with some of Mr. Hinkle's postings actually offensive.
>
>So as one of the 'silent' practitioners out here. I welcome postings that
>place current challenges in the field in a broader social/political context.
>However, I would ask for postings to include (where possible) references to
>materials, articles, books where we could find additional information if we
>choose to pursue it.

I have refrained from posting to the list in the last few days because of
the deluge of polemic, some of it very interesting, but I am not sure what
I have to contribute or want to learn at this particular time.

Anyway, this may not be what you were looking for.

My main interests have been in initiatives that have grown out of
congregations in Detroit, Chicago and NYC. They are involved in some
combination of housing, real estate development, industrial development,
retail and consumer services and job training. They have a wide array of
financing mechanisms and tactics for linking local opportunities to local
workers and businesses. The practitioners can be characterized as both
ideological and pragmatic. Their views and actions map across the range of
opinions expressed regularly on this list about markets, localities,
regions, globalization, cooperatives, accounting, finance, etc.

I did most of my research before welfare reform derailed serious
discussions of faith and economic development as matters of equity in the
local generation and control of wealth. Because I felt there were no
adequate models for explaining such activities in either the social science
or theological literature, I have struggled to develop one to begin a what
will likely be a very long process of filling in the knowledge vacuum.
More economistic approaches don't account for the relevant economic value
of unpaid labor and significant nurturing relationships. Civil society
discussions seem to miss, or misrepresent, the concept of God and faith
almost entirely. Social science tends to mistakenly lump religion with
concern for unity and looks at more segmental issues of markets and
politics as outside the sphere of appropriate religious concerns. Or
religion is conflated with an emphasis on moral values more than
idiosyncratic practices that are engaged pragmattically in faith-based CED.
Social movement approaches set up too strong an ideological tension and
theme of political solidarity that is not really the dominant theme in the
settings I have witnessed. Most theological approaches are too heavily
invested in one religious tradition or style to accommodate the diversity
of practices I have witnessed. There are exceptions to all of these
statements, but on the whole the academic literature is dissatisfying.

I am sending below a copy of a message I sent out on a couple of other
listserves earlier. Elliott Wright would be an excellent contact for any
of you if you have not already met or corresponded with him. He should
know several relevant connections for you to make.

_______________
Elliott Wright has recently edited An Annotated Bibliography for
Faith-Based Community Economic Development. It is for practitioners and
those considering entering faith-based community economic development. It
includes contact information for many regional and national organizations
and for denominational offices committed to this work.

Elliott can be reached at either 202-234-5009 ext 116 (NCCED in Wash.DC),
or 212-870-3921 (United Methodists Global Ministries, NYC) or via e-mail at
EWright@gbgmmail.gbgm-umc.org Elliott has contacts across many different
faith communities around the US.

NCCED published the document with support from the Lilly Endowment and the
Chase Manhattan Foundation. It is available through NCCED. Many
practitioners and educators contributed to the document, myself included.

Eric Clay
PhD Candidate
Cornell University



This post transferred from the cdb-l mailing list

[MAGolden1 at aol.com]

All,

Unfortunately, there is a growing disconnect between those who wish to be
part of a network to become better at the on-the-ground economic and
community development work they do, and those who wish to tell others about
their philosophies and world views.

It would be easier for us to co-exist and learn from each other if
individuals would limit themselves in their posting frequencies. Haven't you
all noticed that there are a small few who keep pushing us down particular
paths? They have shared their philosophies, all well and good. I appreciate
their viewpoints. However, by the third or fourth re-posting perhaps people
should realize that the goal of a large list-serve is not to come up with any
ONE ANSWER TO UNIVERSAL QUESTIONS AND MAKE SURE EVERYONE AGREES, but to think
and progress, with respect for each others' time and opinions.

**What I've done is taken particular discussions off the main list by
deleting the SEND TO CDBankinglist from my reply. I continue my discussions
with individuals who want to continue those discussions.**

Why not try that? That way, you can continue discussions you wish to
continue, without making the rest of the list feel like they are on the
receiving end of a series of sales calls from long distance carriers -- at
dinner time.

Can those of you who post too much sit on your keyboards for a while -- at
least with respect to the general listserve? If not, you'll be destroying
the village in order to save it.


This post transferred from the cdb-l mailing list

[dwohl at tso.cin.ix.net]

Mike Golden suggests:

> It would be easier for us to co-exist and learn from each other if
> individuals would limit themselves in their posting frequencies.
>

I propose an alternative, in line with an earlier posting of mine: fire
away with your ideologies or your practioner-oriented pragmatism, as you see
fit. But show some humility and respect--you are not (and for sure I am not)
necessarily blessed with complete truth, and others are not necessarily
wrong.

And with that, I will take a vow of silence. For a little while, anyway.

David Wohl
Sabino Community Development Resources
4505 N. Quartz Hill Drive
Tucson, AZ* 85750
(520) 760-8976
Fax:* (520) 760-0548
<mailto:dwohl@tso.cin.ix.net>
*



This post transferred from the cdb-l mailing list