Good point all...
Re: [FRIAM] [Vo]:Proposition to the Membership of Vortex List in Regards
to Andrea Rossi
I was not attempting to censor Rich, I was trying to head off a larger
group who might desire to do such, by offering him a method of
self-censor which needn't cut us off from the diversity this list/group
exhibits by it's nature. I do not think Rich's contributions are
outside of our range... just unique in their "impersonal" style.
Rich (not unlike many of us) has a unique style of contribution which
can be unnerving (as are many of our styles) to some... what *I* would
like if anything is a more personal context offered up... too often his
posts remind me of listening to my parents old Zenith WaveMagnet radio
in the back country of NM where at any given time, the weak staticy
newly minted Rock and Roll from KOMA or XROK would be interrupted by a
BBC (or worse, a language I could not decipher) News report fading in
over the music. Unwelcome at one level, yet expanding and therefore
welcome at another.
I'm not much of a follower of fads or conspiracies or even the things
which might turn out to be one or the other, so I'm not that interested
in "yet another" Cold Fusion or etc. ... but I'm also pretty good at
skimming things that don't speak directly or well to me, so Rich's posts
are not a problem for me directly, and I hope others who might not track
the relevance can find their own way to not be distracted overmuch.
- Steve
Well, I'd say what Steve suggested is in a completely different category
from anything like censorship. Awhile back, Owen mentioned thread
hijacking. We've sporadically "plugged" our own work. We sometimes use
the list to review products or services or to complain about some
defector. We top-post, bottom-post, fail to trim quotations, etc. I've
even been accused of "killing the karma", an accusation I cherish to
this day. ;-)
So, Steve's query about guidance for this lonely thread is as much
cultural as the contents of the thread. Indeed, the social scientists
amongst us might be encouraged to discuss how and which building blocks
result in fora with particular phenotypes.
Yeah, I know it's navel gazing... at its worst, even. But I don't think
it's anything like censorship ... more like an acknowledgement that
etiquette matters.
As for the thread on cold fusion, itself... well, I'm very grateful for
the posts. I've been trying to follow it on my own; but it gets lost in
all the other things I'm also trying to follow (like Penrose's CCC and
the concentric circles in the CMB, or the continuing saga of rising
narcissism in college students, etc.) I appreciate them at least as
much as I appreciate the posts on topics like Javascript or new EC2
features. And I particularly like to follow the critical antics of
skeptics. Speaking of which, there's a good entry here:
http://www.thejayfk.com/?p=216
Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 11-01-25 12:37 PM:
I hear you edging out onto the slippery slope of censorship, here. Even if
the cold fusion thing is completely unfounded, it has more interest as a
cultural phenomenon than many of the topics in good standing on Friam.
Don't go there, Steve. Don't listen to him, Rich.
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
