At 12:36 PM 2/14/2007, you wrote: >Marsha wrote, > > >>> I think that putting the MOQ in the hands of Academia would be to > >>> infuse it with low value. > >> > >> I don't have feelings one way or the other. > >> > >> Your choice of words makes it sound like you see the MOQ as something that > >> is or should be controlled. I find that interesting. And for > the longest time I've > >> been puzzled with the wording, "the MOQ" or "the MOQ says" as if it were > >> some sentient entity or recognized work. From my point of view > it is neither of > >> these things. > > > > Hi Kevin, > > > > Controlled? Absolutely not. I just prefer the organic to the > institutionalized. > > > > I am probably using a poor choice of words. Which words would you suggest? > >Kevin: >Hello Marsha. Thanks for asking. I would suggest looking at the >MOQ's current >environment. > >What I found interesting were the words, "putting the MOQ." They make the >MOQ look like a thing that has an environment that can be >controlled, e.g., if it >were given over to academia then it would be affected by the academic >environment or if it is kept here it would not be affected by this >or if we put it there >it won't be affected by that. >
Hi Kevin. I already confessed to using a poor choice of words. I think Ant's thesis is very important, and a positive response from academia _might_ be helpful. I've read 'Lila's Child', and the Lila Squad seemed to create a more serious environment for discussion than the MD environment. I have cringed many times at my own posts. Environment for what purpose? If it is to spread this new worldview, than it's too bad that Anna Nicole didn't have MOQ tattooed on her butt. How would you improve the current MOQ environment? m >How is the MOQ's current environment affecting its evolution? > 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
