Marsha: You seem not to understand the MoQ. Marsha is a flow of events, not the object of your projection. On Jun 14, 2011, at 2:09 PM, Andre Broersen wrote:
> Jan-Anders to Dan: > > We all know that Marshas next contribution is not predictable and therefore > dynamic but does she also got a sense of humour? > > Andre: > Disagree Jan-Anders. Her next contribution is very predictable. The only > thing that cannot be predicted is what static pattern she is going to use: > ignoring the post, evading the issue,wriggling her way out by claiming to be > misrepresented, misunderstood or otherwise wrongfully addressed. > > Anyone of these predictable scenarios involve a static choice. Now, to follow > Dan: if Marsha comes up with a novel response, a response she has not > displayed before, a response which shatters her own predictable patterns... > then she is acting Dynamically. Since I have been on this discuss I have not > seen this. (not that this means much!but go through the archives as well). > > You regard this as a display of dynamic behaviour? > > And, ps, no, I do not think Marsha has a sense of humour. She takes herself > too seriously...too ever changing, conventionally herself. She only laughs in > spite. > > ___ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
