tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22001031.post3891385263295047029..comments2024-02-28T18:29:41.120-08:00Comments on Not of General Interest: Paper is a technology, tooundinehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05589384016564587214noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22001031.post-64177806009065633882010-09-01T19:59:33.252-07:002010-09-01T19:59:33.252-07:00Very interesting, Anon, and thanks for those comme...Very interesting, Anon, and thanks for those comments. I like the idea that you're making the paper do as much work as possible both before and after it's used for your purposes (post consumer before, recycled later).undinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05589384016564587214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22001031.post-18677099009750945972010-09-01T01:12:51.203-07:002010-09-01T01:12:51.203-07:00Very interesting, Anon., and helpful.Very interesting, Anon., and helpful.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22001031.post-56916283618684663922010-08-31T09:42:56.874-07:002010-08-31T09:42:56.874-07:00I serve as chair of the Environmental Studies Depa...I serve as chair of the Environmental Studies Department at a large SLAC and we use a lot of paper. Our students go not bring laptops to class, so even though we distribute a lot of readings via .pdf we expect they will print them. Paper is indeed portable, user-updatable, and field reconfigurable in ways that other technology is not.<br /><br />One thing we try to teach our students is to critically examine their consumption choices. There are many reasons to prefer paper for things like class handouts, written work, etc. I would argue that conference programs, however, are an example of something that *should* be sent electronically...even if you end up printing it out you are at least eliminating the footprint of shipping & distributing a paper copy (which likely would have been printed in color on slick paper as well).<br /><br />The bottom line for me is to insist on 100% post-consumer recycled paper, to reuse as much of that paper as possible, and to recycle at the end. But eliminating paper in favor of a more expensive and arguably more resource-intensive electronic technology is not the sort of decision that should be made without long and careful examination of the costs and benefits of each.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22001031.post-30233227554780213732010-08-28T10:58:31.016-07:002010-08-28T10:58:31.016-07:00I'm all for paper. And it's renewable and ...I'm all for paper. And it's renewable and recyclable.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22001031.post-2137957252550055182010-08-27T20:47:57.448-07:002010-08-27T20:47:57.448-07:00I'm glad it's not just me, Ink. It's t...I'm glad it's not just me, Ink. It's too bad they didn't have cross-references, but even so, without paper it would have been tough to see everything. I think I'm going to regret my eco-guilt in choosing the e-version.undinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05589384016564587214noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22001031.post-2346406069574146082010-08-25T12:42:57.790-07:002010-08-25T12:42:57.790-07:00I mean the session lists were online. Not the act...I mean the session lists were online. Not the actual conference.Inkhttp://inktopia.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22001031.post-73850362043126851742010-08-25T12:41:57.273-07:002010-08-25T12:41:57.273-07:00Agreed.
Esp. about the conference information. ...Agreed. <br /><br />Esp. about the conference information. Last one I went to was all online and I know I missed a bunch of stuff because I never got through the whole listing (and they didn't have crossrefs of people or topics). Was mad about that. Would have been willing to recycle the paper afterwards!!!Inkhttp://inktopia.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.com