From: Lawrence DeBivort (debivort@umd5.umd.edu)
Date: Wed 04 Dec 2002 - 23:58:42 GMT
Well, I'm confused too!
I _think_ I was saying that the notion of paleontology vs. neontology and
its application to categorizing memes was interesting: thus my
'paleomemetics' and 'neomemetics' terms. My apologies for any contribution
to the confusion, and to Scott, if it was his post to which I was
responding, rather than Grants. Or, er, was its Grant's, rather than
Scott's?
Anyway....
Cheers,
Lawry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
> Of Scott Chase
> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 6:30 PM
> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> Subject: RE: Japanese Univ. to set up world meme bank
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: "Grant Callaghan" <grantc4@hotmail.com>
> >Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> >To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
> >Subject: RE: Japanese Univ. to set up world meme bank
> >Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 19:44:23 -0800
> >
> >>>Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 11:49:42 -0500
> >>>
> >>>Interesting thought, Grant...
> >>>
> >>Let me guess. You don't type the "On Behalf Of" part of your
> reply. Your
> >>e-mail set-up does it for you. Funny that I don't see "On
> Behalf Of Grant"
> >>in this reply to me ;-)
> >>>
> >
> >Somehow the atributions are getting all mixed up here. I'm not
> sure what
> >goes out on the end of my e-mail as it's usually stuck on there by MSN.
> >But I've never noticed "On Behalf of" in any of it.
> >
> That's Lawry's e-mail that has the "On Behalf Of..." in the
> header (or would
> it be footer?). He had replied to me thinking I was you and I
> subsequently
> replied to him above.
>
> I think it's the way e-mails are being replied to. Many hare,
> including me,
> reply after the quoted text. Lawry's setup (and possibly others
> too) has it
> where the reply comes before the quoted text. It's no big deal
> until there's
> a whole lot of quoted text with back and forth and multiple replies
> included. Then it gets challenging to figure out who said what. I
> often have
> troble following Kenneth's replys because the way his quoting works, IIRC
> the indentions are confusing.
>
> I guess Wade's ultraconcise approach to quoting and replying has its
> advantages.
> >
> >And I'm not sure which thought you thought was interesting. So
> many things
> >have gone back and forth that I've lost track of what and who
> are replying
> >to what. I'm not even sure that what you're replying to here is
> from me.
> >I often find my name at the bottom of someone else's post making
> it look as
> >if I said it. Maybe if you refresh my memory on which post
> you're talking
> >about I can give you a better notion of whether I said it or not.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
>
>
> ===============================================================
> 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 : Wed 04 Dec 2002 - 23:51:43 GMT