> Andrew Clough wrote:
> As Anders mentioned in his recent post, having more tenses or modifiers for
> different types of knowledge would also be good.
I know I mentioned this, if Anders mentioned it too (at the same time) then we
we are becoming clones of each other. (Brilliant minds think alike blah blah
blah...)
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001, Michael M. Butler wrote:
> Loglan (/Lojban) has some constructs akin to this, IIRC.
>
> Ever hear of the humble "po"?
>
> Edward de Bono coined it as a prefix for, roughly, "the following is a provocative
> hypothetical and I am marking it as such; discuss, but let's not waste time falling
> into troll responses."
Mike, you need to anticipate that a significant fraction of the list
is less well read than you. For your suggestions to be optimally
useful you need to cite references when you introduce an obscure
comment (if only I spend an hour wrestling with Google then it
is ok, but if half the list spends an hour then it is *worth*
your time to leverage our time). I dealt with this by organizing my
sources into a "have read" list so people can familiarize themselves
with my knowledge base (and I can save myself time by citing the list
as a knowledge base that people may need to know some fraction of to
communicate efficiently with me). I would *encourage* you to bite the
bullet and do so as well, then your communications become:
Edward de Bono [1]
[1] http://www.michaelbutler.org/ReadingList/index.html#DeBonoE1955
(n.b. when this URL gets processed into the archives it is
not likely to work)
It wouldn't hurt for other well read people to do this too -- Spike, Damien ?!?).
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:22 MDT