Well, I'd say what Steve suggested is in a completely different category from anything like censorship. Awhile back, Owen mentioned thread hijacking. We've sporadically "plugged" our own work. We sometimes use the list to review products or services or to complain about some defector. We top-post, bottom-post, fail to trim quotations, etc. I've even been accused of "killing the karma", an accusation I cherish to this day. ;-)
So, Steve's query about guidance for this lonely thread is as much cultural as the contents of the thread. Indeed, the social scientists amongst us might be encouraged to discuss how and which building blocks result in fora with particular phenotypes. Yeah, I know it's navel gazing... at its worst, even. But I don't think it's anything like censorship ... more like an acknowledgement that etiquette matters. As for the thread on cold fusion, itself... well, I'm very grateful for the posts. I've been trying to follow it on my own; but it gets lost in all the other things I'm also trying to follow (like Penrose's CCC and the concentric circles in the CMB, or the continuing saga of rising narcissism in college students, etc.) I appreciate them at least as much as I appreciate the posts on topics like Javascript or new EC2 features. And I particularly like to follow the critical antics of skeptics. Speaking of which, there's a good entry here: http://www.thejayfk.com/?p=216 Nicholas Thompson wrote circa 11-01-25 12:37 PM: > I hear you edging out onto the slippery slope of censorship, here. Even if > the cold fusion thing is completely unfounded, it has more interest as a > cultural phenomenon than many of the topics in good standing on Friam. > Don't go there, Steve. Don't listen to him, Rich. -- glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095, http://tempusdictum.com ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
