[PLUG-TALK] Scot Craighead's mailer

[J Henshaw]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Miller, Jeremy" <JMILLER at ci.albany.or.us>
To: "'J Henshaw'" <jeff at jhenshaw.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2002 9:20 PM
Subject: RE: [PLUG-TALK] Scot Craighead's mailer


> > > I was going to switch along and mention that a stone
> > foundation will also
> > > fall if placed on unstable land, subject to liquefaction.
> > <hint>What
> > makes
> > > any particular commodity hold its value over others</hint>.
> >  But since I'd
> > > asked that a few times already to no avail (and no ground
> > is 100% safe
> > > anyway), I passed.  Or did I? :)
> > >
> >
> > Wow,  I see your point,  about the stability of the commodity.
> >
> > I also appreciate that you understand my methods;  but I
> > submit that the
> > rocks amongst the stones are thrown in by others.
>
> Yes, some probably are.  But they simply joined some of your own.
>
> Considering a rock is a stone, it's just hard to pick out which ones you
> want us to step on.
>
> Maybe paint them in bright colors, so that they stand out. :)
>
>
> > > And it is hard to separate the point from the chaff when a
> > much of what
> > you
> > > heard wasn't related to the point.
> >
> > The point was communication being the major problem,
>
> OK.  I'm sure we can all agree that communication (rather, lack of
> communication) would be a problem.
>
> And can probably also agree that we currently have that problem.  Anyone
who
> doesn't, please speak up.  (I'm almost willing to wager there would be no
> takers.)
>
>
> > overpopulation the
> > other
>
>
> I also think we all agree that overpopulation can be a problem.  I was
just
> speaking with Jeme about hunting, and it got into the effects of
> overpopulation among wildlife and the effects of human waste (which is
more
> difficult to deal with as population increases) on fish populations.
> Dissenters, speak up now or hold your peace.
>
> Now, whether or not we agree that this (or any particular region) actually
> is overpopulated or not is probably up for debate.
>
> To continue it, we should :
> 1. Define what we mean by overpopulation
> 2. Define what conditions need to be met in order to consider a region
> overpopulated.
> 3. Determine the boundaries of a region in question.
> 4. Determine based on the definitions and boundaries whether or not the
> defined region is overpopulated.
>
> There are my stones... no need to follow me.  Skipping any but the last
one
> isn't allowed, because it should be clear up front where they lead.
(Though
> the conclusion at this point is unknown.)  Consider reach an understanding
> at each step before continuing, in the interest of saving your breath.
> (Electrons, typing fatigue, or whatever.)
>
> If someone has a better sequence before starting, present it.  Decide on
the
> most logical/thourough one, then continue.
>
> Oh, and have fun.  And be nice about it.
>
>
> > I was going to take it to the next stone when we agree communication
> > problems can be fatal
>
> Did we?  I thought so and implied above.  Again, if someone disagrees, say
> so now.
>
> > There's way more
> > > dots on his page than the ones he wants connected.  And
> > he's laying his
> > > stepping stones through a field of rocks.
> >
> >
> >Yes,  Many participants want to dissect the microbial life
> >under the rocks
> >first,
>
> Which is fine if they like, and they can do it at the same time.  We can
all
> multitask, right?
>
> As long as it is clear who is talking about the bugs (which very well may
be
> interesting) and who is following the stones.
>
> <hint>A good way to do this is to change the subject heading, and make it
a
> clear on.  This goes for all of us, myself included... we're all guilty of
> this.</hint>
>
> > hindering our use of the rock as a stone.
>
> Rock is stone, and vice versa.  If you want to step on the one they're
> looking under, ask them nicely to put it down, and maybe suggest
continuing
> their search under one that you don't intent to step on.  (Subject lines
> should help prevent this from happening, and allow a workaround when it
> does.)
>
> >Lead to the destination, and skip the wild goose chase.
>
> > To do that I must skip Russ, Russell and Jeme.
>
> I disagree.  You were the one trying to lead us someplace, and as such...
> the wild goose in question.
>
> :)