From: "B. Lane Robertson" <metaphy@hotmail.com>
To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Subject: Re: To Stephen Springette from Edryce
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1998 21:23:47 PDT
>Unfortunately, the seduction program has been
promoted in 3 issues of a
>certain "Meme Update" newsletter--but hopefully
not again. Neither the
>newsletter nor the "seduction" program are in any
way central to memetics.
>Those who are central to memetics show respect
for the field as science,
>and not just as a mutual marketing opportunity.
Thank you for your comments. While I agree that
any particular program (seduction or not) is not
central to memetics: I disagree that changing the
subject header is either appropriate OR
inappropriate (except that it might address the
topic of the posts); I disagree that a study of
the spread of ideas as related to internet
marketing is not an appropriate topic for memetic
study; I disagree that this particular newsletter
has ever engaged in "mutual marketing
opportunities" (to my knowledge); I disagree that
anyone who publishes a memetic newsletter (which
you obviously read and/ or are otherwise familiar
with) and anyone who follows the spread of ideas
and reports on them *as* being central to memetics
might be somehow NOT-central to memetics! Don't
we have few enough interested and involved in the
field to start pointing fingers at those whose
methods we don't agree with?
B. Lane Robertson
LIST: mindrec-subscribe@makelist.com
WEB: http://www.window.to/mindrec
BIO:
http://members.theglobe.com/bretthay
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
===============================================================
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