Hi DMB, > Ian [had] replied: > Agreed. Precisely ...
> dmb says: > Dude, you've announced your agreement with one bland statement and totally > ignored the rest. Why ask the question if you're just going to ignore the > answer. Not ignoring, just proceeding carefully, progressively. You say agreement is "bland". To me agreement is something positive worth noting, to pin a few "static latches" into the discourse, otherwise it's all shifting sands. Also, without any visible agreements, actual positions get ignored, perceived positions get misquoted (as straw men) and thrown back as misleading positions in ad-hominem arguments. (Half a dozen examples in this thread alone.) Also, far from "verbose drivel" I'm using "economy of expression" (As in "Agreed. Precisely", as in "Yes, emphatically", etc) to signal agreed points and not waste mail volume on the "bland" stuff so we can get to the meat. References to "verbose drivel" are another spurious straw man, directed at the person. Anyway, given that we agree, MOQ-ish intellectual discourse is "more than" GOF-SOMish intellectual discourse, I will return to some of the suggested answers, Arlo's and yours (and anyone else, before I do ?). Ian 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
