[MD] Changes in 2011

[Dan Glover]

Hello everyone

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 9:01 AM, ADRIE KINTZIGER <parser666 at gmail.com> wrote:
> re
> Hi Dan, thx for your presence.

Hi Adrie

Thank you too!

>Adrie:
> Some time ago i'v launched the idea of providing Mr Buchanan with his own
> thread, solely to work on invitation.
>
> Your idea is better, expanding the thread idea to a core or kernel of
> invited and working on a invitation or grandfathered in-members.
>
> Ideal to develop the understanding of Pirsigs work, ideal to work with a
> core on the core-value's.
>
> A good umbrella to avoid the noise, and avoid infinite regressing patterns.

Dan:
I agree. It (normally) isn't my wont to post as quickly as many here
do. I tend to let an idea gestate a bit, write it out, and put it away
for a few days. Then I pull it out again and examine it for value. But
by that time, whatever discussion I am replying to has long since
devolved. So most of the time, my post is consigned to my draft
folder.


Adrie:
> i support it all the way.
> It is not meant to isolate the other members or to place David on a
> pedestal.
> But to work with a working model.
>
> The other rulings...hmm, not sure.
>
> only an idea of course , to have this isolated Quality-Island, but if it is
> also reversed to another thread,"everything allowed" for the others, they
> will have their own environment as well, without any restrictions in
> content, exchanging recipe's, youtubelinks,drivel,  vomit, sol,..yes having
> their own individual respecting environment.

Dan:
In my time here, it seems to me there are those who are genuinely
interested in furthering Robert Pirsig's MOQ, not their own agenda.
Unfortunately, they are in the minority, not the majority. They need
their own space, or so it seems to me.

>Adrie:
> Of course without the possibility to to steal away content or lines from the
> core-thread or mother thread,or vice versa.
>
> two advantages, the core can move on to progress based philosophy, idea's
> work from you or horse(I consider Horse extremely good)
>
> the other core can shit on forever in an endless loop.
> Of course on a voluntary base.
>
> Its all for Horse to consider it.
> It can work almost without moderation,with the moderator in the core, and no
> need to be in the other.

Dan:
Well, as much as I dislike being moderated, it would serve to steer
the discussion in the direction envisioned by the person who came up
with the month's topic... the moderator. In the "open" forum, a person
starts a thread but it is soon hijacked and veers off into oblivion.
With a moderator actively working to keep that from occurring, perhaps
some real progress might result.

>
>Adrie:
> I support the basic idea, Dan , and thanks for presenting it.
> Keep on the good work!
>

Thanks for the support, Adrie. It is always good to hear from you!

Dan