Dave wrote:
>I think we should. Stand up and say "I am a social ape that can't choose
>not to enter into symbolic fighting for peergroup status" or some better
>thought out and more catchy equivalent.
Yes, I suspect I'm on the cusp between seeing that as a problem and seeing it as an engine for creating positive change. And there I teeter.
>My theory is that people's relationships with others on the list have
>probably become ingrained/learned/established, meaning that there's less
>flexibility in how people react to each other.
Ahhh yes! That's why the newcomers are always so important. They play the same role as adolecents; questioning the stutus quo and shaking up the heirachies. (Because who else will?)
>It could be that you're a similar Tim to how you were x years ago (1996,
>wasn't it? Fucking hell) and that list-dudes still talk about the same
>things, BUT that their relationships- supportive and hostile- have become
>ingrained and predictable.
>
>Could be that we need THREE virus mailing lists, so that people can choose
>which to be a member of based on what views they have on brodielevels, the
>reality of reality, freewill, the mathematical modelability of memetics,
>etc. Maybe then within those lists people would fight less.
>
>FOR A WHILE HA HA HA HA HA HA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
>
>because after a time the relationships WITHIN the subgroups would become
>ingrained again, and there'd be social hierarchies and splits and factions
>once again.
Actually KMO and I were talking about that the other day. Too bad he's away at the moment.
So what hoops would the novice have to jump through to get admitted into The Inner Circle?
-Prof. Tim