[MD] The need for quality

Tue Aug 22 01:18:12 PDT 2017

Can we still be surprised and feel awe when we discover a bird's nest in
the
shrubs or a frog in the polder?,we should be!,....many people loose this
ability early in life.We can ask ourselves,...
Did the emotional/intellectual adaptive filter close too early for them,and
did the pattern dissolve itself to give way for other patterns to
emerge?......,

Sometimes a bit strange that i will take a philosopher stance to stop
thinking about these things, and go back to expiriencing again, as if
everything is anew every day.

Adrie

2017-08-22 9:00 GMT+02:00 Dan Glover <daneglover at gmail.com>:

> Hi guys,
>
> Great discussion!
>
> Hey. Just an aside. Maybe. But maybe not. I just got back from viewing
> the eclipse. First time I ever've seen totality. Had to check what I
> was drinking for if someone'd slipped LSD into it or maybe diced up
> psilocybin mushrooms on that breakfast burrito I had earlier. Took off
> work and drove 400 miles for a totality lasting 2 minutes 40 seconds
> and I'd do it again tomorrow were there another. Mindblowing.
> Completely mindblowing.
>
> See, intellectually I knew exactly what an eclipse is. I knew what to
> expect. But to witness that mofo... that was an experience. People've
> asked me oh did it get dark and did you see stars and did the crickets
> start into chirping and yes to all but Jesus God there were people
> driving past me at the same moment the moon was blocking out the sun
> and their headlights were on and but they never even pulled over to
> look. And they were right there. Right there.
>
> One of  the people I was with said hey it's because we're in Missouri.
> And he wasn't joking. More, though, leading up to the eclipse I kept
> getting nasty messages on Facebook saying: "am I the only one not
> going to the eclipse?" And people are agreeing. Oh yeah. Big waste of
> time, that. I'm not going. As if it is somehow okay to be jaded. No.
> Expected. How one of the wonders of the world is right there above our
> heads and we're too busy or too adultish or too know-it-all to take
> the time and watch and those of us who do revel in the experience are
> dullishly off-kilter, worthy of putdowns.
>
> I'm not much into politics. The wheel turns. Now is the time for
> stupid people to rule. That'll pass as it always does. If you accept
> the basic tenet of the MOQ, that quality and morality are identical,
> then you might also see how what's better is driving evolution on all
> four levels. And what's better doesn't necessarily mean intellect
> always rules. I read this article about how birds what live along
> roadways are evolving shorter wingspans. That doesn't presuppose as
> some would have it an intelligent being overseeing such happenings nor
> is it a matter of chance. Rather, birds with long wingspans are unable
> to fly away quickly enough and are killed by cars thus unable to
> propagate. Short wings are better.
>
> There are so many ah ha moments in life which we gloss over.
> Especially should things not fit with our preconceived notion of the
> world and our place in it. If the MOQ teaches us anything, it should
> be to wake up. To be there. To give our attention to what is right in
> front of us instead of forever planning for tomorrow.
>
> Anyway...
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 8:26 PM, WES STEWART <wesstt at shaw.ca> wrote:
> > People, who ask a question why things are the way they are? Struggle
> with it then spend a lot of time trying to find what is wrong and try to
> find a solution are not the large population.
> > Our thinking  and upper managers (those in organizations including
> government) is clouded because we/they assert to authority, muddled by self
> importance, self interest, greed, jealousies, anxiety, hate and revenge.
> > The scientific way that Pirsig described. It's also Shewharts and
> Demings way to build quality into a society, culture or system. First you
> have to see that something is wrong, and then come up with a hypothesis on
> why it is wrong. Then you plan how to fix it, carry out the fix, and study
> it after to see what happens, then you take action either way on whether it
> worked or not.  They called it Plan, Do, Study and Act PDSA.
> >
> > Our basic educational systems, have not taught critical thinking,
> normally  it is memorize this, he is an approved smart guy , and we have
> approved him.
> >
> > We are biological creatures and trained well by those who run the
> system, we are trained not to think.  Nature creates quality and morality
> into a biological being. If I suffer an injury my blood clots at the source
> of the injury white blood cells standby to attack any bacteria.
> > That's quality, and it would be immoral if someone was to bleed out or
> bacteria invade his body to destroy him. Bacteria are a lower form of life
> it
> > would not be moral if a lower form of life could kill a higher form so
> easily.
> >
> > Intellectuals have managed to change society. African Americans were
> given the right to vote, by an intellectual struggle. There is a long list
> of other victories.
> >
> > A few years back  It became known that the American congress had passed
> over 1500 policies and the majority of these had benfited only those
> wealthy congressman. How do you fix that? People who are leading a society
> that are run not by their intellect, but by biology. (Self interest, self
> importance and greed.)
> > They have and will never seek knowledge of equality, fairness, because
> you need a scientific mind for that, drift off in to that state of absent
> mindedness, gather your thoughts and observations, then struggle with it;
> the mind has to be in a pure innocent state, it may not be possible for the
> majority of politicians. If you can do this you will find something closer
> to the truth.
> >
> > Maybe a few of them may question and find an answer. What does it mean
> about me and my congressional colleagues ? It means we are motivated at a
> simple biological level
> > therefore I share something with pond scum.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Andrew Chu <andrew.chu at gmail.com>
> > To: moq discuss <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
> > Sent: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 18:07:11 -0600 (MDT)
> > Subject: Re: [MD] The need for quality
> >
> > How do we nurture more intellects?
> >
> > From: WES STEWART
> > Sent: Monday, August 21, 2017 3:21 PM
> > To: moq discuss
> > Subject: Re: [MD] The need for quality
> >
> > Hello Andrew,
> >
> > We do not blame our biological patterns but we see them for what they
> are, we contemplate then reflect if they are harmful to ourselves or
> others, then we attempt some change. Do something that breaks up your
> static patterns by using your intellect, by contemplating and reflecting to
> come up with some good ideas. If you unknowingly ate some bad meat, you
> would almost certainly throw up, this is quality in your biological system,
> it has value. It would be immoral for humanity that just because we ate bad
> meat we should die. There was some sort of evolution in our past, a dynamic
> quality that allow us to eat bad meat, not process it but get rid of it
> quickly.
> > If your biological static patterns rule rather than your intellect
> intervening at times, society has constructed prisons for that.
> > If society has hidden rules that abuse a group of individuals our
> intellect should act on this because it has knowledge of fairness and
> equality.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Andrew Chu <andrew.chu at gmail.com>
> > To: moq discuss <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
> > Sent: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 12:07:52 -0600 (MDT)
> > Subject: Re: [MD] The need for quality
> >
> > So the separation of our selves into biological and intellectual I think
> is another sign that there is a missing link somewhere.
> >
> > The beauty of the MOQ is its unifying simplicity.  It gives a framework
> by which we can better understand the world across all mediums be they
> scientific, spiritual or artistic.  But it doesn’t give us an equally
> simplified framework as to how to apply it in our daily lives.
> >
> > We can understand MOQ deeply and yet still struggle to apply it in our
> daily lives, wrestling with the biological, the intellectual and other
> states of mind that each of us have to varying degrees.
> >
> > The fact that even Pirsig/Phaedrus’ character succumbs to his biological
> state more often than not is some proof to this element of human nature.
> >
> > In a nutshell, I think blaming the biological part of ourselves is a bit
> of a cop-out.  As MOQ states, everything comes back to and is sourced from
> quality.  To then apply this to ourselves but then give exceptions for this
> or that state of mind when we step out of high quality states dissipates
> the MOQ’s powerful framework.
> >
> > What is needed is not only a framework for understanding relationships
> of all things, but also a framework for the specific application of that to
> human beings.  Personally, I think what makes humans unique from all other
> subjects beyond our awareness of our own various states, is our ability to
> direct and control our actions.  Our ability to manifest intent into
> physical reality and thus influence quality.  We want to create a race car,
> we can channel our intent towards that.  We want to create an atomic bomb,
> we can do that, too. We want to land on the moon?  Etc etc.
> >
> > I think breaking down the driving force behind these actions into states
> is similar to seeing the reality as a classical/romantic duality.  It
> misses the forest through the trees.  Instead we should focus on the
> driving force itself particularly as it relates to human beings.  And that,
> to me, is intent.
> >
> > From: WES STEWART
> > Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2017 9:21 PM
> > To: moq discuss
> > Subject: Re: [MD] The need for quality
> >
> > Hello Andrew,
> >
> > We are biological beings along with having that ability to go into that
> intellectual state, the innocent seeking state. Feynman talked about that
> state of seeking struggling, often. You are trying to find an answer, not
> trying to manipulate the answer to what you want it to be. Trying to find
> the truth of your observations is this it or what is it the same state of
> mind Pirsig spent most of his life in, this detached state waiting for
> enlightenment, extremely logical and rational.
> >
> > However the biological part of all of us is irrational, not logical,
> easily manipulated. Persig talks about his biological side, a drunkard
> whoring all the time. It needs self importance, is self interested ,
> pleasure seeking, meeting with Robert Redford and his thoughts after we're
> biological ego driven. Our jealosies, greed, anger, hate, arrogance and
> revenge. They are emotional states that are from our biological selves,
> they manipulate and are easily manipulated.
> >
> > It was remember Pearl Harbor , Dresden , and all the evil the axis had
> inflicted on the world. It was an Irrational and illogical decision to seek
> revenge on innocent civilians, Feynman's biological side was duped. Later
> when his  contemplative and reflective side, sought after the truth of what
> he participated in he had his nervous breakdown. Is it an act of value, to
> see how much energy is released when you split the atoms in a small bit of
> matter. Is it possible that it could be used as a deterrent to war?  If you
> have developed a strong deterrent to war , is that not ethical. But to hand
> it over to biologically driven politicians and what they did with it was
> immoral and a human disaster.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Andrew Chu <andrew.chu at gmail.com>
> > To: moq discuss <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
> > Sent: Sun, 20 Aug 2017 17:55:13 -0600 (MDT)
> > Subject: Re: [MD] The need for quality
> >
> > Good points!  I agree.  But question, Richard Feynman strikes me as
> someone who often did exhibit dynamic quality (bongo player, creator,
> traveler, introspective thinker).  But in this case, if he experienced
> dynamic quality while creating the bomb, should he have quit despite that
> on moral grounds knowing that those who had the decision making power to
> use it very well were not reflective and Pirsig-like?  Is this a dilemma
> that puts morality and quality at odds?
> >
> > To what extent should Richard Feynman contemplate the usage of his
> quality work and creations?
> >
> > From: WES STEWART
> > Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2017 5:11 PM
> > To: moq discuss
> > Subject: Re: [MD] The need for quality
> >
> > Hello Andrew,
> >
> > Just one thing there is a difference between, information and knowledge.
> A person may have memorized all that they need to know, and receive a
> degree. Yet they have never gone into that state of absent mindedness and
> sought to discover things on their own like Persig frequently did. There is
> no such thing as a boastful intellect. There is only a boastful biological
> person.
> >
> > Richard Feynman was a physicist on the Manhatten project, After they
> dropped the bomb, in contemplation and reflection he had a nervous
> breakdown because he was part of the death and destruction. The people in
> charge of dropping the bomb, were non-contemplators and reflective people.
> There were no Robert Persigs,  in that group.
> >
> > A person who has a few university degree's means that they have
> memorized the information required to obtain a degree. That's it. That does
> not make them an intellectual.
> >
> > Using your intellect requires an objective scientific approach, gather
> thoughts and information struggle with it for days looking for associations
> for what it's purpose is. Maybe struggle for
> > weeks, then you may get an epiphany like Pirsig. When you have a strong
> feeling of your ideas relevance that's the conclusion of your intellect. It
> is original, and becomes part of you. People with university degrees
> voicing their opinions from what they memorized in school, is not being
> intellectual, nothing original will be discovered, it is static ,there will
> not be a dynamic quality decision that comes out of it.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Andrew Chu <andrew.chu at gmail.com>
> > To: moq discuss <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
> > Sent: Sun, 20 Aug 2017 14:16:06 -0600 (MDT)
> > Subject: Re: [MD] The need for quality
> >
> > Agree humans can be both taught to love and taught to hate.  Even more
> reason that it is such a shame the concept of quality is not more accepted.
> >
> > Without quality, we presume an interaction is negative because the
> object of our interaction has something inherently wrong or unsavory, like
> the example of the boastful intellect.  With quality, we can step back and
> understand and reflect that it is our unique relationship with this object
> that creates a low feeling of quality.  And this we are less prone to
> generalize and extrapolate from single interactions or experiences.
> >
> > But then how do we reconcile this an understanding of quality with
> equality and morals?
> >
> > We can have greater clarity as to the nature of our relationships with
> things but then how do we channel this?
> >
> > The question of morality and quality brings to mind the Manhattan
> project.  Undoubtedly the men and women of that group were invested in
> their work, many of the greatest and most creative scientific minds of that
> generation.  They channeled their quality relationship with science and the
> laws of nature to create the greatest weapon of human history.  How are we
> to judge the morality of this act even if we presume the creation of it was
> a result of high quality work?
> >
> > For me this is a gap in pirsigs work and what I have personally though a
> lot about.  The separation of static and dynamic or the hierarchies of
> quality do not satisfactorily strike at the heart of this conundrum.
> Interested in everyone's thoughts.
> >
> > From: WES STEWART
> > Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2017 2:50 PM
> > To: moq discuss
> > Subject: Re: [MD] The need for quality
> >
> > Thanks for the reply Andrew;
> >
> > Returning back to your first post Andrew, the US versus THEM mentality.
> It was never with Pirsig US, (Robert Redford the celebrity actor and Robert
> Pirsig the celebrity author) and the THEM people like Lila.
> >
> > None of us are born with any knowledge of equality and respect. On the
> other hand humans are naturally biological beings full of self importance,
> self interest, reacting emotionally with jealousy and greed. Someone may
> give us information on equality and respect, we may even parrot it back
> when it suits or purpose, however still we have no knowledge of it.
> >
> > Now take a scientific approach to understanding equality andrespect,
> look at it from an objective unbiased point of view. Gather your thoughts
> and observations then struggle with it defining what it is or is not, place
> yourself on the giving and receiving end of it, struggle with it some more,
> introduce some contradictions. Leave it sit for a day or two then go back
> analyze it to a high degree like Pirsig. Some very strong lights come on,
> it has made us a bit more humble, yet we experienced small epiphanies like
> Pirsig.
> >
> > Now that's an intellectual discovery, the same way a musician discovers
> a new song, or a researcher discovers a new drug. It's personal and
> original. A month later you may be around someone who tells you how
> marvellous he really is, and underhandedly making suggestions that he is so
> much smarter than you. It subjects us to a low quality event meeting
> someone like that, boasting from his biological self we can see that his
> intellect has not moved.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Andrew Chu <andrew.chu at gmail.com>
> > To: moq discuss <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
> > Sent: Sat, 19 Aug 2017 23:55:13 -0600 (MDT)
> > Subject: Re: [MD] The need for quality
> >
> > Hey Wes, good to meet you.
> >
> > So it’s interesting, I actually thought Lila was inconclusive in its
> ending.  I know the core of the book is meant to explore quality and its
> implications with respect to morality.  And in that his effort to do what
> was best for Lila, Pirsig seemed to offer a conclusive end at first glance.
> >
> > However, personally I think, while it was a necessary next step
> following ZAMM, Pirsig’s conflation of morality and quality is what made
> Lila a weaker piece.
> >
> > The core question to me relates to that of human intent.  Did he do what
> he did with a creative intent or a consumptive intent?  That is the
> critical question in my mind.
> >
> > Recall that in ZAMM, Pirsig deploys an untrustworthy narrator to an
> expert degree (he has said that Phaedrus is actually the hero of the story
> and the narrator is in fact the ghost).  Perhaps, unbeknownst to us, Lila
> is a similar work, where the entire treatise is a giant rationalization for
> Pirsig’s effort to capture Lila for his own.
> >
> > The fact that he made an effort to challenge Rigel and save her in his
> own mind is moral by any common standard, but morality, like quality
> itself, is in the eye of the beholder, and as we all are human, we know
> that what is in the mind and in the eye is not always reflective of what is
> in the heart.
> >
> > I would prefer to put aside the concept of morality for the moment and
> consider the most basic delineation of any human action.  Is it either done
> with creative intent or consumptive intent, i.e. are you seeking to invest
> yourself into something to create something greater than the sum of the
> parts or are you looking to extract something from the world for your own
> benefit or pleasure?  The same exact action, take the challenging of Rigel
> for instance, can take on wildly different implications given a differing
> intent of the subject.  It’s very difficult to observe at the moment of the
> action, but I think human experience and history shows us that the
> cumulative consequences of seemingly similar actions taken with divergent
> intents ultimately show great disparity, i.e. actions cumulatively taken
> with extreme consumptive intent, over time, generally resemble what most
> would refer to as morally evil, whereas actions cumulative taken with
> creative intent, generally resemble what most cultures would refer to as
> morally good.
> >
> > I wonder then, if Lila saw something that we the reader were not privy
> to.  Perhaps, she saw that despite all of Phaedrus’ noble rationalization,
> he still ultimately wanted what every other John wanted in her past.  And
> thus she chose Rigel, because at least there was no pretense about what he
> was or why he did what he did.
> >
> >
> > From: WES STEWART
> > Sent: Saturday, August 19, 2017 5:41 PM
> > To: moq discuss
> > Subject: Re: [MD] The need for quality
> >
> > Hello Andrew,
> >
> > I am new here too, found out about the site a few days ago. I use to be
> on Demings  quality management Linked-in discussion group.
> >
> > Thanks for the post! Pursig had stated our ability to reason;
> contemplative and  reflective  thought is at the top of the MOQ. This is
> what can bring change to a culture or society. He also stated morality and
> quality are the same thing; this is similar to  William Edwards Deming.
> The owner of an organization must have quality inside his character, in
> order to be capable of providing a quality product or service.
> >
> > In Lila towards the end; when Lila has her epiphany clutching the rubber
> doll, Pursig takes on what he feels is his moral responsibility to look
> after Lila for the rest of her life.  Even when Rigel shows up offering to
> take her away, Pursig challenges him, knowing it is not in Lilas best
> interest. His life without Lila
> > would be much easier is what his biological self would urge; however his
> morality and quality of character have been built through his intellect.
> >
> > Pursig had empathy with Lila knowing what she was probably going to face.
> > Pursig was always in an inner struggle trying to make sense or find
> purpose in the world. He knew who he was and was trying to make the world
> his students lived in a better quality atmosphere in which to learn, he
> abandoned grading at Bozeman. Deming spoke openly as a University professor
> , that no one ever fails his class , everyone gets a passing grade.
> >
> > Quality in a human being is all about character. I agree with you,
> bigger houses, more diplomas, expensive cars, boats and other toys have
> nothing to do with a quality human being. It was in Pursig when he decided
> to do what's best for Lila, look after her for the rest of her life. He
> strongly interceded against Rigel taking her but was over ruled by Lila.
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Andrew Chu <andrew.chu at gmail.com>
> > To: moq discuss <moq_discuss at lists.moqtalk.org>
> > Sent: Fri, 18 Aug 2017 21:24:07 -0600 (MDT)
> > Subject: [MD] The need for quality
> >
> > Hello all,
> >
> > My name is Andrew and I came across this site after re-visiting Zen
> recently.  Zen was, without a doubt, the book that has made the most
> formative impact on my own personal philosophies and values.
> >
> > So I’m not sure who else is still active, but figured it was worth
> reaching out.
> >
> > It seems to me that the world today could benefit greatly from a broader
> understanding of Quality.
> >
> > The fundamental framework that qualities are intrinsic in things,
> peoples, cultures is driving more and more swaths of humanity apart.  Your
> quality is determined by where you live, what car you drive, what language
> you speak, the color of your hair, the religion you practice, the party you
> voted for.  These are all driven by the simple humanistic tendency to make
> sense of the world by creating symbolic representations of disparate pieces
> of data and observations.  However, without an understanding of the nature
> of quality, these simple models have in many ways *become* the world.  The
> representations have become the reality.
> >
> > And that’s a problem.
> >
> > The simple acknowledgement that quality exists within the relationship
> between things, encompassing both the subjective and the objective nature
> of our individual experiences, could give people the freedom to feel
> comfort in their own perspective on the world while also understanding that
> that relationship is unique to them and might not be shared equally by
> others.  It could give us the opportunity to start breaking down some of
> the increasingly prevalent Us vs Them dichotomies we see in the world.
> >
> > Anyhow, I hope this finds everyone well.  I look forward to engaging in
> dialogues about all things Quality.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Andrew
> >
> >
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> >
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> >
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> >
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> >
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> >
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> >
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> >
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> >
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> >
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> >
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org/md/archives.html
> >
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>
>
>
> --
> http://www.danglover.com
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>

-- 
parser