Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 10:41:09 -0500
To: firstname.lastname@example.org, <email@example.com>
From: Aaron Lynch <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: The race is on
At 01:02 AM 9/17/98 -0700, Tim Rhodes wrote:
>Aaron Lynch wrote:
>>You are one of the partisans in this dispute, not a neutral arbitrator.
>I have never made such a claim. Please do not misrepresent me, Aaron, it
>is, as you have pointed out, bad form and childish.
>>This is not a clash between theorists and experimentalists.
>Perhaps I am wrong in perceiving that this debate has, in part, been born
>out of the fact that current work in memetics fails to bridge the gap
>between theory and experiment. (As pointed out by Edmonds "On Modelling in
>Memetics" http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit/1998/vol2/edmonds_b.html ) As I
>see it, if any one set of theories *had* successfully bridged this gap, we
>would not be having this discussion now.
>That is simply my observation of what is going on here, yours may be
>>that is fine. Indeed, it might be a better use of your efforts than trying
>>to present yourself as some kind of race judge.
>Again, please do not misrepresent me, Aaron. It is bad form and ironically
>hypocritical coming from you at this time.
Staying to facts: You present yourself as one to announce that there is a
race, that the race is on, and, to a significant degree, how contestants
shall be judged. To me, this calls for a reminder that you are not an
arbitrator or a race judge. Nothing hypocritical or childish about it at all.
>>Gatherer did not propose any experiments in his paper. I did propose
>>experiments in my paper.
>>If you want to run in a race for empirical corroboration of your views,
>I have asked you once already to site these references. I am asking again,
>if you please, can you direct me to them?
>The only race I am interested in is one for empirical corroboration.
>But perhaps that is not a race you have interest in. I'm sorry.
What this demonstrates is that you have been participating in this
discussion without even reading the main papers in contention. It seems
that you read Gatherer 1998 but not Lynch 1998, despite the fact that Lynch
1998 is a main focus of Gatherer 1998. To me, this indicates that you are
not presently qualified to judge the relative merits of Gatherer 1998 and
The paper in question is Units, Events, and Dynamics in Memetic Evolution
(Lynch, 1998). It is at
You can search for the word "experiment" yourself.
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)