Nah, nice guess, dave, but wrong.
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 8:58 AM, david <[email protected]> wrote: > Ian said: > Reddit is just a social tagging application... It's not rigorous research > obviously, it's as good as the community that interacts,... > > dmb says: > Yea, that's what I thought. Apparently, John was being sarcastic - or he > thinks that things like facebook and twitter count as "rigorous research". > > Jc: I'm sorry I brought it up. It was referring to a discussion Ian and I were having elsewhere, on the value of such things as reddit in research and accessing information. My comment was that while I see their value, my own process is more random and idiosyncratic - going where the wind blows and as the spirit moves, rather than following a crowd-sourced solution. dmb: > Sometimes I think the debates in this forum might spring from actual > philosophical differences - but then I see how the thinking goes on > ordinary matters (like the values of social media or Amazon book reviews) > and then I realize the debates spring from sheer idiocy. > > hmm. well, I think "sheer idiocy" is an overblown and inaccurate assessment of Horse's skills as a moderator, but maybe you're projecting again. If you want actual philosophical debate, try owning an actual philosophical attitude. Lovers of Wisdom are slow to jump to conclusions and open to learning. John 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
