Re: Standard definition

From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Thu 31 Oct 2002 - 02:42:29 GMT

  • Next message: Wade T.Smith: "Re: Standard definition"

    >
    > On Tuesday, October 29, 2002, at 09:01 , AaronLynch@aol.com wrote:
    >
    > > However, to skeptics, making too much use of even that
    > > consensus may cause problems. For example, our journal is
    > > called Journal of Memetics -- Evolutionary Models of
    > > Information Transmission.
    >
    > Don't forget the mention in the Mini-Annals of Improbable Results of
    > the Journal as one of the least read examples of narrow-focus
    > publications.
    >
    > - Wade
    >
    Thus is the *initial* fate of the truly cutting-edge avant garde. The world will catch up with us if we persevere, and even if we don't; it just might take a lot longer.
    >
    > ===============================================================
    > 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 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 2.1.5 : Thu 31 Oct 2002 - 02:46:45 GMT