[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] Indexes: Main | Date | Thread | Author

RE: [ba-unrev-talk] Fwd: [issues] Ockham's Razor

I actually rather like personalities. Some of my best friends have one, and
I'm not keen to abstract them away for the sake of a quiet life. My point
was less about focusing on issues over personalities than about choosing
which issues to focus on here.    (01)

There are plenty of places to argue about
unilateralism/imperialism/energy/the UN/GM food/Enron/how to get pizza
grease out of a new t-shirt/West Bank Settlements/the Filioque/etc. Over a
good meal I'd like to hear what you all think about these, but there are
rather few places to discuss bootstrapping. Personally I'd prefer people
brought all their foibles and idiosyncrasies to this discussion, realizing
that we are *not* about to bring world peace but that we might get somewhere
on augmentation.    (02)

If we figure out a little bit more about how to talk we'll have done plenty.    (03)

-g    (04)

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org
[mailto:owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org]On Behalf Of Eric Armstrong
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2002 8:56 PM
To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org
Subject: Re: [ba-unrev-talk] Fwd: [issues] Ockham's Razor    (05)

Graham Stalker-Wilde wrote:
> We're not going to agree on this. Too many diverse opinions, too many
> political agendas. I could probably sit down with any one of you and have
> fine meal, but the amount of bickering here is just kinda funny. Which
> might be the unrev point...
Actually, it points up the need for IBIS-style tools, so that issues
can be the focus of the conversation, instead of personalities --
especially when some are inclined to polarize the discourse.    (06)