Stefan Pernar wrote:
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:10 PM, Richard Loosemore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
Ben Goertzel wrote:
Feedback on AGI-06 overall was overwhelmingly positive; in fact
Richard's is the only significantly negative report I've seen.
Of course, if the conference was filled with low-quality
presentations and low-quality comments from participants, then all
of those people who gave presentations and who made comments would
be BOUND to give an objective evaluation of the quality of the
conference, wouldn't they....? ;-)
They wouldn't have any vested interest in saying "What a success!",
would they?
And if one person gave a poor evaluation of the conference based on
specific points of fact, rather than just feel-good opinion (if, for
example, that person noted a complete inability of the participants
to talk about the main theme of the conference in a technically
accurate way), that empirically-based observation would count for
nothing, compared with the great "feeling" that everyone had about
the meeting?
Ben: I admire your patience.
Richard: congrats - you just made my ignore list - and that's a first
Another person who cannot discuss the issues.
Another person who, instead, indulges in personal abuse.
This field will stand or die according to the number of people in it who
can address issues, even when those issues are challenging and/or
embarrassing.
Richard Loosemore
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=101455710-f059c4
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
