🚀 go-pugleaf

Simon,

My previous message focussed on some key problems which I have with
the Grove/CACM article, as published.  I think that Grove is an intersting
product/project and that there is much of interest and
value in your article.

I am generally sympathetic to the technical report of Grove
in your article.  However, I was definitely disappointed by
the kind of social analysis which was reported in the article
and in the overall portrait of social analysis  in CSCW and computing
that you & your colleagues wrote.

I suspect that am reading the artcile differently than you
intended .... and as an author, I sometimes find  that readers &
reviewers read my work differently than I intend .... But that's
one value of forums like this ... to sympathetically but forthrightly
hash out ideas .... to advance the debates/understanding
(and see how we're being mis/understood.

Best wishes,

Rob