Re: Standard definition

From: Scott Chase (ecphoric@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue 05 Nov 2002 - 03:49:11 GMT

  • Next message: joedees@bellsouth.net: "Re: electric meme bombs"

    >From: "Wade T.Smith" <wade_smith@harvard.edu>
    >Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    >To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    >Subject: Re: Standard definition
    >Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 21:35:29 -0500
    >
    >
    >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.
    >
    >
    Well "Old Yeller" may not be safe after all, given these sentiments (yours and Aaron's especially). Yet, rabidity remains to be determined.

    _________________________________________________________________ Choose an Internet access plan right for you -- try MSN! http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp

    =============================================================== 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 : Tue 05 Nov 2002 - 03:53:00 GMT