Led by Dan Cohen

• Are the digital humanities forever?
  • Dan Cohen suggests that DH will eventually just become "humanities"
  • George Williams has elsewhere said that we're all always already digital
• What's distinctive? What's so new? What might require us to say that it's a totally different entity than what we've had before.
• Are the tools even methodologies so much as that they are different techniques? After all, we could have Marxist digital humanities or feminist digital humanities.
• What's the intersection with collaboration with libraries and departments? Why are departments still involved?
• Is DH building tools? Theorizing?
• Do we need to keep the DH linked to regular departments to help keep people linked to a method of scholarship, since literary scholarship will continue to be linked to a tradition of literaty scholarship (whether it is digital or not)? If we keep it linked to the department, then it will also force the departments to think about how they are going to recognize and reward digital scholarship. And once tenure and promotion processes are clarified, then it because easier/more comfortable for more people to start doing digital scholarship.
• What do we want to accomplish with DH?
• How can we have peer review of DH not just replicate the process that it's been happening in the print world? How can these tools help us change the way that we think about evaluation?