Mike S. et al. I've lived in northern new england twice, and long enough, to have leaned the language (e.g. "'yup, nope' and other Vermont conversations"), so I really don't mind the concise or pithy or even abbreviated in surface structure, especially as I frequently catch emails on the fly and send notes on a Blackberry with that tiny little keyboard. Not that I don't appreciate the longer, more academic posts, I do. As far as references, I would rather use PsychArticles for tracking down detailed information and quotes and finely honed logic on those small number of topics that I am interested in and can devote serious time to. I find that TIPs is at its best for quick tips and pointing people in the direction of more information ... but, as they say, bandwidth is inexpensive.
========================== John W. Kulig, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology Director, Psychology Honors Plymouth State University Plymouth NH 03264 ========================== ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Smith" <tipsl...@gmail.com> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" <tips@fsulist.frostburg.edu> Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2010 12:20:04 PM Subject: Re: [tips] Canada's early intolerance In response to: "It is tiring and unnecessary (I think) to wade through a lot of verbiage particularly on a list-serve" Allen said " I find that a rather remarkable comment, on two counts. First, no one has to "wade" through any post on this listserv" First the first statement isn't really remarkable at all. Of course, if you want to be very literal you can claim Allen's response as being a legitimate interpretation. Of course it isn't, and he knows it I presume (or perhaps I presume too much). An intelligent interpretation would be that the statement presumes the person is interested in the subject. Then to find out what the author is saying, the reader must read all the verbiage. If Allen and Mike P really believe that it's news to people that they don't have to read what they don't want to......well what can you say. Allen's second point. "Second, this is a listserv for professionals (academics, one might say). There are some issues that cannot be dealt with adequately in a few concise sentence..." This is clearly wrong. There is no subject no matter how complex that cannot benefit from concision. It also excludes most of the posts here since almost nothing discussed here is "complex". In addition, no one suggested that the response: not be well thought out must be limited to a few sentences. not include references The actual point was: Complete english sentences and paragraphs are unnecessary and so are quotes. Including these actually detracts from the essential points. That is, for busy "professionals (academics, one might say)." --Mike --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: ku...@mail.plymouth.edu. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13338.f659d005276678c0696b7f6beda66454&n=T&l=tips&o=6624 or send a blank email to leave-6624-13338.f659d005276678c0696b7f6beda66...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6703 or send a blank email to leave-6703-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
