Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id IAA28533 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 25 Jan 2001 08:59:56 GMT Message-ID: <00e401c086ac$535748e0$5eaefea9@cable.rcn.com> From: "Aaron Agassi" <agassi@erols.com> To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> References: <203F0199CBACD211BCC100508B91BC471056CB@CSGSERVER> Subject: Re: this list Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 03:53:45 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
----- Original Message -----
From: "Diane Benscoter" <diane.benscoter@csgpro.com>
To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 2:30 PM
Subject: Re: this list
> In fact, if you care to interpret Chris Lofting's impenetrable prose for
us,
> Diane Benscoter, please feel free! I'm sure we all will be duly impressed.
>
> Aaron, interpreting Chris Lofting's prose is not something I feel the need
> or desire to do, though I do see valuable information in what I have read
> from Chris. I also have great respect and appreciation for your
> contributions to the discussions. Also, impressing others is of no
interest
> to me. Learning is.
>
> Now, it pains me that all this is so unpleasant for you to witness, Diane
> Benscoter. But attacking us for at all protesting the abusiveness of Chris
> Lofting seems a little unfair from where I sit.
>
> I'm genuinely sorry that you felt attacked.
I employed the verb 'attack' purely in the academic sense of criticism....
>My observations were not
> directed at anyone in particular.
Yes, I understand that. However, by a attacking/criticizing the conduct or
attitude of a group of people, implicitly one attacks/criticizes the conduct
or attitude of each individual to which that applies. And, so, I addressed
your attack upon me, rather than saying "us", simple because I only intended
to speak for myself, without presuming to represent anyone else.
>It just seems that insults are more common
> in this discussion list than I'm used to seeing in any other discussions
> that are of interest to me. From my perspective, it gets in the way of
> the point of the discussion.
Basically, some invective has mostly expressed sheer irritation. But what I
want to express is that consistent points of order have been raised to Chris
Lofting. And he has ignored them.
>Obviously, there are a number of ways to
> protest. There has been no shortage of destructive ways, historically,
that
> the human race has found to deal with disagreements. The members of this
> list seem to have far above average intelligence and access to
information.
> Utilizing constructive forms of communication seems like a reasonable
> expectation from a group like this. Just doing away with name calling
would
> be a good start. Again, I'm not pointing at any one person. Thank you
for
> responding to my concern. I'll go back to watching and learning now.
>
I propose to put aside our invective irritation with Chris Lofting, and
focus upon those points of order which we need to consider together with
Chris Lofting.
> diane.benscoter@csgpro.com
> www.csgpro.com
> 503-292-0859
>
>
>
===============================================================
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 : Thu Jan 25 2001 - 09:01:42 GMT