I vote 9 but agree with Keith and Marco. Try it for a month and if it works
then move it to another discussion group.
Phil.
>From: "Keith A. Gillette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: MF CALL FOR VOTES - March 2000
>Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 21:36:21 -0600
>
>I vote for #2, even though #9 has already won.
>
>I concur with Marco's assessment below. Number 9 amounts to a "slow reading
>list", which is a great idea, but I think something quite separate from
>MOQ_Discuss. Many such lists exist for other texts and we'd probably do
>well to look at their structure, as I think they have a unique set of rules
>to guide discussion.
>
>At 10:31 PM 2/28/00 +0100, Marco wrote:
> >Moffers,
> >
> >it seems that number nine is going to be the winner. I also love this
>idea,
> >but I want to make some considerations.
> >Don't you think that this topic is going to change the nature of MF?
>Don't
> >you think there's the risk to lose MF discussions along one year, and
>fall
> >in a "philosophology" trap: an infinite discussion fully centered only in
> >RMP and MOQ?
> >
> >So I say: ok, let's try for one month! But then I suggest to create a new
> >space of discussion dedicated to it.
> >
> >So I vote for number nine, just for one month.
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
