[MD] Horse's Ruling

[ARLO J BENSINGER JR]

[Craig]
I don't see the sense in starting new threads/subjects just because someone
approaches from a different viewpoint.  Bo has stated that his view is based on
Pirsig's from ZMM, while others' are from "Lila".   Let the 2 compete,
side-by-side.

[Arlo]
I think Steve's request and Horse's point is that the subject Steve wanted to
discuss (Theocracy, et al.) was dropped when I responded to Platt's point, and
this gave Bo an "in" to push the SOL unrelated to the thread. This was my
mistake. 

And I don't think its entirely unreasonable to ask people who wish to "tangent"
a thread to rename the subject line. I should've done this, and again that was
my mistake.

BTW, Bo's view is NOT Pirsig's from ZMM, it has now become the
"pre-hospitalized Pirsig" only... and who better to speak for the
pre-hospitalized Pirsig than Bo... (certainly NOT Pirsig, that "weak
interpreter" and SOM sell-out he became... prostituting himself for the love of
that evil academy...)

Bo's view is Bo's. It is a revision of Pirsig's MOQ and its best just called
Bo's MOQ. It is not an "interpretation" of Pirsig, as Pirsig has said there is
nothing in his metaphysics that would lead to the SOL.

If Bo was not so desperate for interpretative legitimacy (witness his contempt
for Ant and others whom Pirsig chooses to interact with), he'd see this as the
only valid ground he has. Instead, well, you can say "let them compete", but
talk to Ron about how likely THAT is...