Glen -
I guess at this point, I've proposed a model that is not particularly
well validated (by me)... but then that is usually what this level of
discussion consists of doesn't it? Speculation about what models
*might* have some validity and how they *might* be tested and maybe some
anecdotal dogpiles to support/contradict the models proposed?
It seems the norm for this mailing list. But other communities can be
more tolerant of deeper exploration. I'm not addicted to "closure".
But I do seek it out and appreciate it when I find it. (I've really
enjoyed Arlo's recent resurrections.)
I would suggest that the norm for this mail list tends to stop at
proposing a model very informally with some occasional argument pro and
con and an occasional reference to scholarly work by someone. That
satisfies me most of the time, though *more* would always be welcome.
I appreciate both your and Arlo's deeper questioning of my informal
suggestion of a model.
- Steve
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
