I've read them all and in-the-moment (so far) it's stuff I know already.
In my recent email move, I recovered some of the old journals from 2002
that I didn't know I had, and it was fun to revisit what was going on
then.
Also, this may vary depending on rate of play, but maybe a "monthly
magazine" is a better model than a weekly journal - that gives long
enough to summarize e.g. the full proposing and implementation of a
proposal, or a full round of some subgame - three weeks is long enough
to lose track of daily happenings and get a reminder, while a week might
not be.
On 1/2/2019 7:05 PM, ATMunn wrote:
Ok, good to know.
On 1/2/2019 9:23 PM, ais...@alumni.bham.ac.uk wrote:
On Wed, 2019-01-02 at 21:20 -0500, ATMunn wrote:
During the holidays, I still checked my email, but didn't really pay
much attention to Agora (but there also wasn't much to pay attention
to). I'm sure I'm behind on reports and stuff, and obviously haven't
been doing Agora Weekly. I will try to resume these soon.
One quick question though: Is anyone actually reading Agora Weekly? I
know they haven't been much yet, but there hasn't been much activity.
I will gladly keep doing it, but if nobody is reading it then there's
no reason to. I'm not looking for attention or anything, I just want
to know if my time doing that is well spent.
I read it, but then I already read the lists anyway so know most of the
information already (although sometimes it reminds me of details I've
forgotten about).
This sort of information is often most useful in retrospect, so that we
can look at events years after they happened and think "oh, that's what
Agora was like in early 2019". By then, we're likely to have forgotten
most of it.
