RE: Central questions of memetics

From: Wade T.Smith (wade_smith@harvard.edu)
Date: Wed May 10 2000 - 13:56:20 BST

  • Next message: Vincent Campbell: "RE: A useless meme for Chuck" 

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id NAA20569 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 10 May 2000 13:59:23 +0100
Subject: RE: Central questions of memetics
Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 08:56:20 -0400
x-sender: wsmith1@camail2.harvard.edu
x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, Claritas est veritas
From: "Wade T.Smith" <wade_smith@harvard.edu>
To: "memetics list" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID: <20000510125657.AAA20977@camailp.harvard.edu@[128.103.125.215]>
Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk

    On 05/10/00 08:45, Vincent Campbell said this-

    >So why, in
    >pornography, for example, probably the most obvious of the primal factors
    >being explored, are there 'stars'- both performers and directors, whose work
    >is more widely viewed, and more highly regarded by fans/industry?

    Ah- so this whole memetics thing is just an excuse to get a grant to
    watch Racquel Darrian tapes at work....

    Shoulda known.

    - Wade

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 10 2000 - 14:00:16 BST