Re: To Stephen Springette from Edryce

B. Lane Robertson (
Mon, 31 Aug 1998 21:23:47 PDT

From: "B. Lane Robertson" <>
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

Get Your Private, Free Email at

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)