From: Van oost Kenneth (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat 24 May 2003 - 15:34:01 GMT
----- Original Message -----
> I got it; I just don't agree with it, for a plethora of good solid
> which I have been giving here over and over and over again...will
> nothing penetrate your self-constructed filters?
> A bad definition is just that - a bad definition. Defining something adds
> nothing to its credibility if the definition is bad; it simply highlights
> lack of same. You're trying to tell people that the mail service is the
> letter. It just doesn't wash. The letter is necessary for there to be
> something TO mail, and before it's mailed, it's still a letter.
Joe, I think Wade is trying to say that by writing a letter the idea of
having a service to mail it is included_ the one can 't exclude the other.
And yes, before a letter is mailed it is still a letter by definition but
by ' meaning ', it isn 't mailed !
There is a tic and tac about this kind of stuff.
What's the point of having a mail service if noone ever writes letters
that were to be mailed !?
Within the concept of writing a letter and having the intention to mail
it, the idea of a mail service is part of the equation.
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)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat 24 May 2003 - 15:40:40 GMT