encountering (of the best kind) this unposted email.. sending it to make space around...
ÙÙÙÙÙÙÙÙÙÙÙÙÙ
anyways, Brian, you could also become the referee and master of your (another) list... it's up to anybody on this list...
(JUST TO MAKE THE REFERENCE TO THE APPRENTICE LEARNING SUCCESSFULLY HOW TO BECOME THE MASTER OF HIS OWN FUTURE, even about communication, collaboration a.s.o. on the www).
note the relation between referee and reference. the judge and the comparison. the necessity of standard to help compare.even in design.
P.
----- Original Message -----
From: "brian carroll" <human@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <DESIGN-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2004 12:22 AM
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> These defined intentions have been consistent and unchanged since the
> initiation of Design List 12 years ago.
an intention is not a definition: you are required, by your
own requirements expected of others, to be explicit in
your declarations of truth: which does require defining
each of the above concepts so that, within the definitions
you choose, open communication can exist in your 'U'
or uni-verse (single-verse).
single and also common verse, here.. each thinker has his own universe, but such belongs to the common, universal, one....
The diagram seems largely
idiosyncratic to me, but you'll have to explain how things
really are so the uniformed are able to realize what they
are missing about the universality of your ideas defined.
> However, some subscribers occassionally seek to use Design List for
> implicit political intentions.
> This should be seen for what it is, and nothing more than what it is.
hmmm. what are you saying -- can you give an example Howard?
explicitly, lawyers would love this, you need to provide evidence
and make a case and surely the jury will rule in your favor-- it is
your internet court, anyways, you're at the controls-- and there is
absolutely nothing political in your actions and reactions, hmmm....
> Making explicit political, or other, connections to the catagories of
> discussion on Design List should be a simple matter.
>
> .H.
simple but not too simple, so you'll have to enlighten as to
where this line that you see, as list referee, actually is, so
that your politics are equally treated within the same rules.
freedom to spam political architectural tracts of ideologies
that are bringing the world to ruin? sure, why not, but why
not allow others to send ideas which counter other views?
make it simple- make it clear- and make it explicit- as this
is an important case-study in why either you're going to
lose this absurd position or you will not win by ignorance.
or, you may choose to censor, as you may be itching to do.
quite oedipal, nobody ever took you down a few notches?
--
The Design-L list for art and architecture, since 1992...
To subscribe, send mailto:design-l-subscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To signoff, send mailto:design-l-unsubscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
Visit archives: http://lists.psu.edu/archives/design-l.html
ÙÙÙÙÙÙÙÙÙÙÙÙÙ
anyways, Brian, you could also become the referee and master of your (another) list... it's up to anybody on this list...
(JUST TO MAKE THE REFERENCE TO THE APPRENTICE LEARNING SUCCESSFULLY HOW TO BECOME THE MASTER OF HIS OWN FUTURE, even about communication, collaboration a.s.o. on the www).
note the relation between referee and reference. the judge and the comparison. the necessity of standard to help compare.even in design.
P.
----- Original Message -----
From: "brian carroll" <human@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <DESIGN-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2004 12:22 AM
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> These defined intentions have been consistent and unchanged since the
> initiation of Design List 12 years ago.
an intention is not a definition: you are required, by your
own requirements expected of others, to be explicit in
your declarations of truth: which does require defining
each of the above concepts so that, within the definitions
you choose, open communication can exist in your 'U'
or uni-verse (single-verse).
single and also common verse, here.. each thinker has his own universe, but such belongs to the common, universal, one....
The diagram seems largely
idiosyncratic to me, but you'll have to explain how things
really are so the uniformed are able to realize what they
are missing about the universality of your ideas defined.
> However, some subscribers occassionally seek to use Design List for
> implicit political intentions.
> This should be seen for what it is, and nothing more than what it is.
hmmm. what are you saying -- can you give an example Howard?
explicitly, lawyers would love this, you need to provide evidence
and make a case and surely the jury will rule in your favor-- it is
your internet court, anyways, you're at the controls-- and there is
absolutely nothing political in your actions and reactions, hmmm....
> Making explicit political, or other, connections to the catagories of
> discussion on Design List should be a simple matter.
>
> .H.
simple but not too simple, so you'll have to enlighten as to
where this line that you see, as list referee, actually is, so
that your politics are equally treated within the same rules.
freedom to spam political architectural tracts of ideologies
that are bringing the world to ruin? sure, why not, but why
not allow others to send ideas which counter other views?
make it simple- make it clear- and make it explicit- as this
is an important case-study in why either you're going to
lose this absurd position or you will not win by ignorance.
or, you may choose to censor, as you may be itching to do.
quite oedipal, nobody ever took you down a few notches?
--
The Design-L list for art and architecture, since 1992...
To subscribe, send mailto:design-l-subscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To signoff, send mailto:design-l-unsubscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
Visit archives: http://lists.psu.edu/archives/design-l.html