LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for UCD-STAFFORDBEER Archives


UCD-STAFFORDBEER Archives

UCD-STAFFORDBEER Archives


UCD-STAFFORDBEER@LISTSERV.HEANET.IE


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

UCD-STAFFORDBEER Home

UCD-STAFFORDBEER Home

UCD-STAFFORDBEER  October 2008

UCD-STAFFORDBEER October 2008

Subject:

Re: Snowden & Cybermen

From:

allenna leonard <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 18:18:31 -0700

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (2177 lines)

Hi All,

Here is a limited dispatch from the political trenches where I'm spending a few days campaigning for a promising challenger for a normally Republican Congressional seat in Western New York by the name of Eric Massa.

Had an interesting lunch before I left with Mark Van Clief who was talking about his work with executives and boards based on Elliott Jacques time span of control.  A basic premise is that 85% of managers have a time window of one to three years, 10% from three to five or a bit more and 5% ten and up with respect to their decisions.  Maybe systemic thinking is similar with some people thinking well inside the box and others outside the box to varying degrees and in varying directions.  I don't think it is directly related to intelligence...whatever that is.

Best,
Allenna


--- On Thu, 10/30/08, BARRY A CLEMSON <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From: BARRY A CLEMSON <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Snowden & Cybermen
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Thursday, October 30, 2008, 9:49 AM
> Joe,
> 
> Some years ago I had lunch with a lady who was doing very
> interesting  
> applications of the VSM. Eventually I asked her which of
> the books she  
> had read. She looked a little embarrassed and finally said 
> 
> approximately this; "Well - actually I haven't
> read any of them -- I  
> just looked at the diagrams. The diagrams make it all
> intuitively  
> obvious." My sister had the same reaction to my book
> about Stafford's  
> work. She said "After you read it, you realize it is
> all intuitively  
> obvious."  And then of course there were those of my
> students who just  
> found the entire thing incomprehensible (I like to think
> they were a  
> small minority, but one can never be sure how many of the
> students are  
> simply trying to tell teacher what he wants to hear...).
> 
> If we could figure out why some think it is intuitively
> obvious and  
> others can't get it at all, we would be better able to
> sell it to the  
> world ...
> 
> In a previous post I suggested that Gordon Pask's
> distinction between  
> holist learners and serialist learners might be relevant to
> this  
> question. No one responded to that suggestion and I took
> that to mean  
> that no one found it helpful??? If not holist vs serialist,
> then what?
> 
> Barry
> 
> 
> On Oct 30, 2008, at 4:01 AM, Joseph Truss wrote:
> 
> > Hi Russell et al,
> > rc writes: "…there seems to be something at
> work in the brain/mind  
> > which makes the VSM appear as an Egyptian hieroglyph
> to some -- and  
> > yet afford deep insight to others. What is this
> thing…"  Recursivity  
> > in 2 dimensions is an impossible construct,  I think
> that what  
> > recursivity meant  to Stafford could probably be most
> closely  
> > modeled using fractal geometry.  Before Mandelbrot,
> smoothness  
> > reigned in mathematics, only by iterating roughness
> did we come to  
> > better understand and model 'real nature'. 
> The complexity leaks  
> > between and among recursive systems are part of the
> make-up of  
> > roughness that defines their own  boundary conditions
> - in essence  
> > all boundaries are fractal in nature. Recursivity has
> no need to  
> > describe embedments that run any deeper than the
> largest  
> > organizational form which contains them. Recursivity
> is a 'smoothed'  
> > version of the underlying fractal which even when
> iterated to  
> > infinity will not completely fill its dimensional
> space (ie be  
> > completely smooth).
> > I can only speak from my direct experience (the
> non-mystical kind)  
> > of Stafford's coherence as a viable system and why
> I believe his  
> > corpus of work will become the bedrock of viable
> society (however it  
> > might take much longer than our own lifetimes - but
> this is our  
> > challenge, not his).  S was not only a great thinker
> and scientist -  
> > he was wise (the farthest reaches of the data /
> information /  
> > knowledge / wisdom continuum).  He never compromised
> his own  
> > intellectual and ethical nature and was always
> therefore able to  
> > find, in his very literary way, the best way to
> express what he  
> > thought was true.  Not to invoke mystical, psychic or
> 'out-there'  
> > impressions, but in a rational sense I believe we have
> a  
> > manifestation of transduction of pure cosmic
> architecture through  
> > the fractal cns structure and continuous iterations of
> self  
> > actualizing of one of the world's greatest
> thinkers. The challenge  
> > for those of us who share the belief that this is
> needed now, is  
> > that we have to transduce S.  This doesn't mean to
> me that we don't  
> > continue to seek better ways, but it does mean we must
> first better  
> > understand the invariant architectural forms that lead
> to   
> > structures that promote viability.  We see the effect
> of the  
> > Fibonnacci spiral in the Nautilus shell and in a pea
> plant's ability  
> > to maximize surface area to sunlight.  Any structure
> that exists in  
> > nature today contains design geometry iterated not by
> a computer,  
> > but by millions of years of evolution.  The
> transduction of pure  
> > cosmic architecture into viable structures.
> > Geometry is the bridge between Art and Science and SB,
> the polymath,  
> > was an astonishing artist and poet.  We shared some
> common  
> > iconography as in the enneagram and of course the
> icosahedron, and  
> > had arrived at some similar places through our
> separate esoteric and  
> > other life journeys, but I cannot account for how I
> understood  
> > Stafford except through a resonant coherent
> architecture that I  
> > miraculously grokked.  Geometry was the  bridge
> between Stafford's  
> > genius and my cockiness.  My broken record refrain for
> modeling and  
> > designing using particular tangible structures
> reflects my belief  
> > that the architecture that defines all things, living,
> inanimate,  
> > mechanical, etc.  has invariants that govern all
> structure, are  
> > scale independent to the quantum level, and are
> manifest in every  
> > thing that has structure.
> > I saw on NOVA recently that scientists are using
> fractal geometry to  
> > measure the carbon uptake of forests.  They cut down a
> tree and  
> > document the numbers, sizes and spacing of the
> branches and graph  
> > the results.  They then measure the girth of tree
> trunks and their  
> > relative distribution around the felled tree and graph
> these  
> > results. Yep - the graphs are self similar.  What this
> means is that  
> > they can now very accurately calculate, using fractal
> geometry, the  
> > uptake of a single tree and apply it to scale to the
> entire forest.   
> > Notice from where the fractal similarities came.  The
> branching of a  
> > single tree compared to the girth distribution of
> seemingly random  
> > growth around it.  This is the sense in which I mean
> recursive  
> > levels are fractal.  The complexity ‘uptake’ of a
> single level of  
> > recursion is fractal to the entire organization!
> > We have experienced the same phenomenon you describe
> above with the  
> > icosahedron. It led the many great thinkers who
> pondered it to deep  
> > insight and yet there are many more who only see  the
> Star of David  
> > and with the currency this symbol holds in some social
> contexts, it  
> > might as well be an Egyptian hieroglyph.
> > Re the word cybernetics, S fought to not have the
> meaning of the  
> > word de-legitimized.  So much so that he argued
> against the term  
> > 'second order cybernetics' as he felt the
> concept had been included  
> > in the original term cybernetics and was therefore
> redundant.
> > On the other hand, the name of the fish is not the
> fish.
> > However, since the Creationists co-opted the term
> 'intelligent  
> > design' it has made use of this term even by the
> evolutionists who  
> > coined it, meaningless.
> >
> >
> > Joseph Truss
> > Abbey North Drummers
> > Open Futures
> > Team Syntegrity AG
> >
> >
> > From: R Clemens <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 7:09:51 PM
> > Subject: Re: Snowden & Cybermen
> >
> > I am struggling to see the issue(s) DS brings up about
> systems  
> > thinking, cybernetics and information as being
> pragmatically  
> > relevant to better management and governance in
> general.
> >
> > I assume in some 10-15 years some smart new idea will
> be in full  
> > flower that will place DS (i.e cognitive sciences) in
> much the same  
> > position as he now feels SB & VSM are -- i.e. left
> behind.
> >
> > However, it is useful, I think, to try and delve
> deeper into what he  
> > is saying -- I get the sense here that DS is to SB/VSM
> (community)  
> > as the Development Directorate is to the Operations
> Directorate (S$- 
> > S3) -- albeit we are talking theory systems. Certainly
> the dynamic  
> > and tone reflects Chap9 in Heart.
> >
> > I am reading through Cognitive science in Wikipedia (I
> have not the  
> > time or means to find a more academic sources at this
> time) -- e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_science
> 
> > . I note there are ample references to systems and
> computer  
> > sciences. e.g.
> >
> > Cognitive science is an interdisciplinary field with
> contributors  
> > from various fields, including psychology,
> neuroscience,  
> > linguistics, philosophy of mind, computer science,
> anthropology,  
> > biology, and physics. Cognitive science tends to view
> the world  
> > outside the mind much as other sciences do. Thus it
> too has an  
> > objective, observer-independent existence. The field
> is usually seen  
> > as compatible with the physical sciences, and uses the
> scientific  
> > method as well as simulation or modeling, often
> comparing the output  
> > of models with aspects of human behavior. Still, there
> is much  
> > disagreement about the exact relationship between
> cognitive science  
> > and other fields, and the interdisciplinary nature of
> cognitive  
> > science is largely both unrealized and circumscribed.
> >
> > I note that there is some reference to Functionalism
> that may be  
> > somewhat relevant
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functionalism_(psychology)
> >
> > I will have to read more but I sense that Snowden may
> be taking one  
> > stream (amongst many) of the cognitive sciences field.
>  I still have  
> > yet to see or understand what his issue with systems
> thinking etc is  
> > based on -- apart from perhaps limited understanding
> or practice of  
> > it. As someone once said in past exchanges, wisely I
> thought, "...  
> > he will better appreciate the VSM when his company
> grows and he has  
> > to deal with operational reality -- e.g. invoices and
> pay  
> > cheques ..."(or words to that effect, Dear Luc) .
> >
> > I certainly do not want to offend Dave or anyone else
> here, there  
> > are many with much to say of merit, but there seems to
> be something  
> > at work in the brain/mind which makes the VSM appear
> as an Egyptian  
> > hieroglyph to some -- and yet afford deep insight to
> others. What is  
> > this thing? It must be more than business -- DS's
> reactions to VSM  
> > and systems thinking etc are commonly found in
> management cohorts I  
> > work with. Hence perhaps why we are in the mess we
> find today.
> >
> >
> >
> > --- On Thu, 30/10/08, Patrick Hoverstadt
> <[log in to unmask] 
> > > wrote:
> > From: Patrick Hoverstadt
> <[log in to unmask]>
> > Subject: Re: Snowden & Cybermen
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Received: Thursday, 30 October, 2008, 9:19 AM
> >
> > I suspect that one area of confusion /
> miscommunication between two  
> > disciplines (if I can use that term pretty loosely) is
> that  
> > “information” is being mixed up with “data”.
> Information implies  
> > (actually it states it) the construction / maintenance
> of form, so  
> > patterns. Data in debased modern usage means just
> “things” often  
> > numbers. Its proper meaning is a fixed reference
> point, but since in  
> > organisations, its rarely connected to any structural
> reference  
> > point, most “data” is just free-floating in a sort
> of managerial  
> > space, waiting to be plucked out of the air and used
> for any purpose  
> > that seems helpful, even if the data has no real
> relevance.
> >
> > I suspect that when Dave Snowden is talking about
> information  
> > processing, he doesn’t mean information processing
> (which is the  
> > building and maintenance / re-creation of patterns) I
> suspect he’s  
> > actually thinking of shoving chunks of “data” down
> tubes, wires or  
> > synapses. Which of course we aren’t – big
> assumption there, at least  
> > I’m not. Same words, totally different meaning.
> >
> >
> > From: Forum dedicated to the work of Stafford Beer
> [mailto:[log in to unmask] 
> > ] On Behalf Of Joseph Truss
> > Sent: 29 October 2008 21:57
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Snowden & Cybermen
> >
> >
> > Stefan, thank you.  This is helpful.
> > In terms of my own narrative (and limited
> understanding), when  
> > Einstein realized that 3 Dimensions did not meet the
> requirements of  
> > relativity the 4th Dimension of Time was added to the
> 3 'existing'  
> > Spatial Dimensions.  The science of the day didn't
> need 4- 
> > Dimensional math to calculate its perceived reality. 
> Time has no  
> > physical existence and Space without Time is
> meaningless. Enter  
> > Spacetime.   In the Standard Model time has no
> enforced or required  
> > direction. The equations all work whether you run time
> forward or  
> > backward.  Information as statistical expression, or
> as 'that which  
> > changes us', takes on a different physical
> attribution in quantum  
> > physics.
> (http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/1658).  In the  
> > trinity of inter-transformable Energy / Matter /
> Information, it is  
> > not only that one can convert the entire universe into
> bit-carrying  
> > chunks and thus have a quantifiable 'information
> space' with an  
> > information limit based on the capacity of the cosmic
> hard-drive.  
> > From the attached article:  "The important new
> observation is that  
> > information is not independent of the physical laws
> used to store  
> > and process it (see Landauer in further
> reading)".
> > Even if the brain processes 'blends and
> patterns' are these not just  
> > aggregates of information?  Is information not a
> fractal  
> > phenomenon?  Information is surely requisite for
> pattern  
> > recognition, isn't it?  Anyway my geometric
> intuition keeps me from  
> > accepting triadic wholes and I would add Time to the
> above trinity  
> > and have four inter-transformable aspects: E/M/I/T.
> >
> >
> > Joseph Truss
> > Abbey North Drummers
> > Open Futures
> > Team Syntegrity AG
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Stefan Wasilewski <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 11:32:01 AM
> > Subject: Re: Snowden & Cybermen
> >
> > Harold
> >
> >
> > I'm reminded of 'does the tree exist if
> there's no-one to there to  
> > hear it fall?'. I'm closer to Shannon and
> Weaver than MacKay because  
> > whilst I agree it is the impact that proves
> information definitely  
> > existed it doesn't mean it doesn't exist or
> that subsequent impacts  
> > weren't biased by the availability of the
> information as a context  
> > when another more key decision needs to be made (am
> open to debate  
> > on the philosphy of the original information).
> >
> >
> > Equally if you take the meme approach it is the order
> of and the  
> > presence of elements in a process that is important
> (3-D and Time)  
> > and therefore if a gene is information it too relies
> on presence and  
> > order in time to make an impact.
> >
> >
> > I've been steadily going through Dave's C-E
> website, papers,  
> > listening to his podcasts, and slowly coming to the
> conclusion that  
> > the VSM has a key role to play and has not 'moved
> on' because it  
> > didn't need to nor did Newton as he adequately
> explains things to  
> > the average man's frame of reference  to all
> practical purposes.
> >
> >
> > All who can bring light onto raw data
> (disintermediation is good  
> > here) and proper reporting (disintermediation is good
> here) have a  
> > role to play in getting a better understanding of the
> role System  
> > Theory (whatever name you want) has to play in
> governing the world  
> > we see and the way we want to see it going forward.
> >
> >
> > The VSM doesn't need to worry about emergence to
> my view as it is a  
> > map not the real thing and a guide to what's
> needed, that things  
> > emerge and are sustainable over time should be a shock
> what is  
> > curious is that the all have consistent functional
> structures that  
> > look like the VSM (avec autopoesis) . Equally the role
> of the  
> > communication network within the VSM, with its own
> meta-level  
> > decision requirement, leaves a lot to be explored
> especially when  
> > considering cellular automata and quantum resonance.
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >
> > Stefan
> >
> >
> > On 29 Oct 2008, at 11:28, Garderen, Harold van wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Interesting perspective Dave gives on Cybernetics. In
> my view the  
> > post WW-II Macy conferences have ended in the split
> between the "AI"  
> > people that believed that information had value on its
> own and that  
> > also popularized the idea that human can be augmented
> as is/was  
> > often popularized in SciFi.
> >
> >
> > To illustrate the OTHER view I copy here two
> para's of a forthcoming  
> > publication that I'm currently writing:
> >
> >
> > Where Shannon and Weaver [7] in their famous
> Information Theory  
> > defined information as a statistical entity, in terms
> of what it is,  
> > Donald Mackay [8] argued during the early stages of
> the Macy  
> > Conferences that only signals that brought about a
> change in the  
> > recipient contained information. Thus Mackay defined
> information in  
> > terms of what is does. It is clear that Shannon and
> Weaver have  
> > fully convinced the technological audience while, with
> hindsight,  
> > Mackay can be placed as belonging to the realm of
> social studies  
> > where this view on information had been commonly
> accepted already  
> > since the 19th century.
> >
> >
> > We, the beneficiaries of the latest "information
> technology  
> > blessings", again start to realize that Mackay
> was right. In a world  
> > where one is flooded with meaningless bits and pieces,
> it is not so  
> > hard anymore to reverse ones’ opinion and embrace
> the view that that  
> > whole kluge [9] of air- controlled basements, servers,
> mainframes,  
> > storage racks, cabling, switches, connections,
> protocols, filters,  
> > streams, files, applications and screens are just
> holders, carriers  
> > and presenters of endless tides of meaningless data
> that convey no  
> > significance unless we, humans, enact it, construct
> and attach  
> > meaning and find ourselves changed in the process.
> Then, and only  
> > then, communication has been accomplished.
> >
> > I still hold some form of hope that Mackay's view
> will become so  
> > popular that it really will get some impact. If that
> happens the  
> > word Cybernetics will get a whole new meaning. IF
> HOWEVER we should  
> > forget about the word and adopt a new one to make it
> happen I  
> > suggest that we drop the word :-)
> >
> >
> > Finally, I find it quite hard to point down where in
> the VSM way of  
> > thinking the concept of  "emergence" that
> Dave is often referring to  
> > can come forward when working with the VSM. In that
> sense I think  
> > Dave is right when he says the world has moved on.
> Another view  
> > could be that "emergence" was/is such in
> integral property of VSM  
> > inspired work that I missed it. Anyway making that
> property (if it  
> > is included) more prominent again might help bridging
> the "good old  
> > work" to "todays interests".
> >
> >
> > So far my 2 cents.
> >
> >
> > Harold
> >
> > From: Forum dedicated to the work of Stafford Beer
> [mailto:[log in to unmask] 
> > ] On Behalf Of R Clemens
> > Sent: woensdag 29 oktober 2008 11:46
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Snowden & Cybermen
> >
> > FYI -- see below
> >
> > --- On Wed, 29/10/08, Snowden Dave
> <[log in to unmask]>  
> > wrote:
> >
> > From: Snowden Dave
> <[log in to unmask]>
> > Subject: Re: Snowden & Cybermen
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Cc: [log in to unmask]
> > Received: Wednesday, 29 October, 2008, 6:47 PM
> >
> > The problem with the word is that stems back to
> information  
> > processing models of the human brain, something common
> to a long of  
> > systems dynamics (and more generally systems
> thinking).   Cognitive  
> > science has moved on from that time and we now know
> the brain does  
> > not process information, but instead blends and
> activates patterns  
> > (that is a gross simplification but you get the
> point).  The irony  
> > is that this allows for humans to be augmented by
> technology, but  
> > points to natural limits in that technology.   As I
> have said in  
> > several of our conversations, the agenda have moved
> on.  We all owe  
> > a great debt to Beer et al, as quantum mechanics owes
> a debt to  
> > Newton .
> >
> >
> >
> > Dave Snowden
> >
> > Founder & Chief Scientific Officer
> >
> > Cognitive Edge Pte Ltd
> >
> >
> > Now blogging at www.cognitive-edge.com
> >
> >
> >
> > On 28 Oct 2008, at 12:49, R Clemens wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Dr Snowden
> >
> > The BBC series Dr Who has played an important part in
> forming the  
> > public mind over the last 40 years.
> >
> > You mention not liking the word
> "cybernetics", and I note that one  
> > of the evil archetypal characters in the series is
> known as  
> > 'Cybermen'.
> >
> > It has been suggested the head dress of these BBC
> characters looks  
> > similar to Stafford Beer's VSM diagram.  In
> checking the Wikipedia  
> > site I note specific mention to Norbert Weiner and
> also,  
> > interestingly, to a negative St Pancras crowd reaction
> to a public  
> > presentation of the character in the streets. (* see
> below)
> >
> > Given your comment below "...and cybernetics
> (which I don't like as  
> > a word)..." do you think there is a hurdle here
> in expecting a  
> > neutral response from (a) people/public; (b)
> management; and (c)  
> > other professionals, who, like yourself may become
> exposed to the  
> > management cybernetics of Stafford Beer?
> >
> > If so, do have any free advice to give on what might
> enhance  
> > contemporary 'coupling capacity' with Stafford
> Beer's VSM?
> >
> > regards
> > Russell
> >
> > (p.s. if you wish to respond, please email me & I
> will post it to  
> > the Listserv for others to read -- as we seem to have
> certain  
> > technical considerations in place stopping non-members
> submitting  
> > responses directly at this time.)
> >
> > History
> >
> > Conceptual history
> >
> > The name "Cyberman" comes from cybernetics,
> a term coined in Norbert  
> > Wiener's book Cybernetics or Control and
> Communication in the Animal  
> > and the Machine (MIT Press, 1948). Wiener used the
> term in reference  
> > to the control of complex systems in the animal world
> and in  
> > mechanical networks, in particular self-regulating
> control systems.  
> > By 1960, doctors were performing research into
> surgically or  
> > mechanically augmenting humans or animals to operate
> machinery in  
> > space, leading to the coining of the term
> "cyborg", for "cybernetic  
> > organism".
> >
> >
> > In the 1960s, "spare-part" surgery was
> starting out, with the first,  
> > gigantic heart-lung machines being developed. There
> were also  
> > serious suggestions of wiring the nerve endings of
> amputees directly  
> > into machines for quicker response.[5] In 1963, Kit
> Pedler had a  
> > conversation with his wife (who was also a doctor)
> about what would  
> > happen if a person had so many prostheses that they
> could no longer  
> > distinguish themselves between man and machine. He got
> the  
> > opportunity to develop this idea when, in 1966, after
> an appearance  
> > on the BBC science programmes Tomorrow's World and
> Horizon, the BBC  
> > hired him to help on the Doctor Who serial The War
> Machines. That  
> > eventually led to him writing, with Gerry Davis's
> help, The Tenth  
> > Planet for Doctor Who.
> >
> >
> > Pedler, influenced by the logic-driven Treens from the
> Dan Dare  
> > comic strip, originally envisaged the Cybermen as
> "space monks", but  
> > was persuaded by Davis to concentrate on his fears
> about the  
> > direction of spare-part surgery. The original Cybermen
> were imagined  
> > as human, but with plastic and metal prostheses. The
> Cybermen of The  
> > Tenth Planet still have human hands, and their facial
> structures are  
> > visible beneath the masks they wear. However, over
> time, they  
> > evolved into metallic, more robot-like designs.
> >
> >
> > The Cybermen attracted controversy when parents
> complained after a  
> > scene in The Tomb of the Cybermen in which a dying
> Cyberman spurted  
> > white foam from its innards. Another incident was
> initiated by  
> > Pedler himself, who took a man in a Cyberman costume
> into a busy  
> > shopping area of St. Pancras. The reaction of the
> public was  
> > predictable, and the crowd almost blocked the street
> and the police  
> > were called in. Pedler said that he "wanted to
> know how people would  
> > react to something quite unusual," but also
> admitted that he "wanted  
> > to be a nuisance."[6] Pedler wrote his last
> Cyberman story, The  
> > Invasion, in 1968, and left Doctor Who with Gerry
> Davis to develop  
> > the scientific thriller series Doomwatch.
> >
> > (Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberman)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- On Mon, 27/10/08, Snowden Dave
> <[log in to unmask]>  
> > wrote:
> >
> > From: Snowden Dave
> <[log in to unmask]>
> > Subject: Re: Snowden
> > To: "Garderen, Harold van"
> <[log in to unmask]>
> > Cc: [log in to unmask],
> [log in to unmask]
> > Received: Monday, 27 October, 2008, 8:49 PM
> >
> > Thanks Harold and nice to see you engaged.  I
> haven't got time to  
> > write an essay but a couple of points:
> >
> > - I think aspects of Beer apply to the complicated
> domain of cynefin
> >
> > - I think the complex space needs managing, its not
> just leaving it  
> > alone or assuming that a community of interest (more
> complicated)  
> > will solve it.  More techniques like SNS, but also
> specific actions  
> > to vary constraints and connectivity.  The difference
> is a solution  
> > will be emergent and unique and will not fit in a
> model
> >
> > - Stuart (had dinner with him a few months ago) more
> important the V/ 
> > M I think, his latest badly written book has some real
> insights in it.
> >
> > - If Beer was around today he would be into (and would
> understand)  
> > complexity and cybernetics (which I don't like as
> a word) would be a  
> > different place
> >
> > And yes, we need to do some very different things if
> the world is to  
> > survive in any humane form - just blogging that
> >
> >
> >
> > Dave Snowden
> >
> > Founder & Chief Scientific Officer
> >
> > Cognitive Edge Pte Ltd
> >
> >
> > Now blogging at www.cognitive-edge.com
> >
> >
> >
> > On 27 Oct 2008, at 08:40, Garderen, Harold van wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Russell,
> >
> >
> > First of all "yes" I meant "his
> work".
> >
> >
> > What I meant to say about "nestedness" is
> that the Cynefin model  
> > suggests that the "hard/intractible
> problems" are situated in the  
> > complexity domain (upper left corner, forgive me Dave
> :-) ) and can  
> > be treated (or at least tried to) by a group of
> "interested" people,  
> > a community of interest so to say. Ofcourse these
> people come from  
> > their respective parts/departments or groups in- or
> outside the  
> > organization and a such they are from different
> "nests", but not on  
> > the sense of "nestedness".
> >
> >
> > What I meant with prescribing is that Dave
> never/hardly? prescribes  
> > while Beer explicitely models organizations in a
> nested way with the  
> > resource bargain as part of the disussion while
> forming a lower  
> > recursion. I'm not sure it will help, as Dave
> seems to assume that  
> > once such a CoInterest is formed they are given the
> resources (f.e.  
> > time) to work on the problem.
> >
> >
> > Knowing the Dave is regularly involved in treating (or
> at least  
> > consulting for) problem that have to do with improving
> humanity, I  
> > have copied him in with this email. As far as I know,
> Dave knows  
> > about the Varela/Maturana work and about Stuart
> Kaufmann's work too.  
> > The latter might be as important as the last.
> >
> >
> > Harold
> >
> >
> > From: Forum dedicated to the work of Stafford Beer
> [mailto:] On  
> > Behalf Of R Clemens
> > Sent: zondag 26 oktober 2008 23:54
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Snowden
> >
> > Dear Harold,
> >
> > Thank you for this positive view. I think you are
> right about the  
> > potential here -- for both sides of the coin (and for
> humanity as  
> > well, without trying to save the world!). I will pass
> on the very  
> > nice term "Beer proof" (with attribution) to
> Dave --  I'm sure it  
> > will enter the lexicon down the track.  ;-)
> >
> > With Dave, on this matter, I have used the idea of
> "conceptual  
> > coupling" (as per Maturana & Varela) as a
> reconciling of certain S5  
> > issues in operation -- and I hypothesis, if both
> models/approaches  
> > are real, from real identities, then it is accord with
> the VSM , and  
> > polite society, to follow this route.
> >
> > Question: how do you think "prescribing nested
> forms of  
> > organization" in Dave's work would help (a)
> his work; and (b)  
> > coupling?  I'm thinking of how to broach the topic
> with him. At the  
> > moment I've just used the term "Black
> box" to describe my  
> > interpretation of his way of dealing with the issue.
> >
> > regards
> > Russell
> >
> > p.s. I assume your "I would really encourage he
> work to be  
> > integrated in these discussions." should read
> "I would really  
> > encourage his work to be integrated in these
> discussions."-- is this  
> > correct?
> >
> > --- On Mon, 27/10/08, Garderen, Harold van  
> > <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > From: Garderen, Harold van
> <[log in to unmask]>
> > Subject: Re: Snowden
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Received: Monday, 27 October, 2008, 6:45 AM
> >
> > Friends,
> >
> >
> > That is right, Dave's view is in no aspect at odds
> with Staffords'.  
> > That is a rare thing today. I think Dave is one of the
> few  
> > contemporary management thinkers that can be regarded
> as "Beer- 
> > proof" today. In particular his Cynefin model
> (see paper section of  
> > mentioned website) can be seen as covering most of the
> dynamic  
> > features Beer has put into the VSM.
> >
> >
> > On the other hand Dave's work is not so structured
> as Beers' VSM.  
> > Cynefin isn't prescribing nested forms of
> organization. In fact is  
> > doesn't say anything about organizational form
> whatsoever.
> >
> >
> > I would really encourage he work to be integrated in
> these  
> > discussions. Not only contentwise, but also because
> Dave is  
> > succesful and booming. An "integration"
> (hope the word doesn't  
> > convey to many wrong meanings here) could speed up the
> broadening of  
> > interest for the VSM in my view.
> >
> >
> > With kind regards,
> >
> >
> > Harold
> >
> >
> > From: Forum dedicated to the work of Stafford Beer
> [mailto:[log in to unmask] 
> > ] On Behalf Of R Clemens
> > Sent: zondag 26 oktober 2008 14:17
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Snowden
> >
> > Roger
> >
> > If you are interested this link is Snowden speaking in
> Melbourne  
> > before he came through Perth recently. Careful
> listening will show  
> > that he covers many of the VSM aspects -- at least I
> cannot find any  
> > conflict with it.
> >
> > http://www.cognitive-edge.com/podcasts/WS330063.mp3
> >
> >
> >
> > --- On Sat, 25/10/08, R Clemens
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > From: R Clemens <[log in to unmask]>
> > Subject: Re: Snowden
> > To: " Forum dedicated to the work of Stafford
> Beer " <[log in to unmask] 
> > >
> > Received: Saturday, 25 October, 2008, 10:00 AM
> >
> > Roger:
> >
> > It is discursive and digressive and as the Irish would
> say (I  
> > assume): to be sure to be sure, I'd have to tell a
> longish story  
> > about the truth as I see it myself.
> >
> > However, in summary:
> >
> > Dave Snowden is a very well informed Welshman I came
> across in my  
> > studies of scenarios etc some years ago because of his
> writings on  
> > the use of narrative while he worked in IBM (through a
> company  
> > merger).
> >
> > He is now one of the originators of the new field of
> Knowledge  
> > Management. He is an expert in complexity science and
> its  
> > application to management practice. We are trialling
> his approach  
> > Cynefin framework
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynefin) and  
> > software called SenseMaker at my department. (see
> http://www.sensemaker-suite.com/) 
> >  -- e.g.
> >
> > "It is a pre-hypothesis based research tool, a
> knowledge repository  
> > and a decision support system in one coherent
> package."
> >
> >
> > The approach emerges from a foundation in complex
> adaptive systems  
> > theory, cognitive sciences and narrative &
> anthropology. (http://www.sensemaker-suite.com/concept.htm 
> > )
> >
> >
> > He was in Perth for a day en-route
> Melbourne-Singapore, and I was  
> > host.
> >
> > He appears both as academic and businessman. He has
> strong opinions  
> > on many things -- one of which is that Stafford
> Beer's model of the  
> > brain and the VSM are wrong -- or at least out of
> date. [There are  
> > strong S5 issues at work here]
> >
> > He does not have a cybernetic or systems orientation
> although I need  
> > to be careful here. Ralph D Stacey (Complexity &
> Creativity in  
> > Organizations) would appear to be someone Snowden is
> aligned with.  
> > He did degrees in Philosophy & Physics.
> >
> > Don't lose sleep over it. I find it interesting
> and useful to  
> > synergise both SB & DS views (and one or two
> others). I mentioned at  
> > Metaphoruim 2008 (last slide) that I/we were planning
> to trial  
> > SenseMaker as a follow-on from our scenario work. 
> After some  
> > extended email discussions (you think these are long!)
> - I tortured  
> > him enough to consider it theoretically possible to
> use his  
> > SenseMaker approach to verify the VSM hypothesis.
> >
> > To try this I now need to develop the right set of
> signifiers (a  
> > term he uses that is more than tagging) to show there
> are five  
> > interwoven systems and cultures at work (i.e. S1 thru
> S5). I would  
> > hope for some help from people here when the time
> comes (and it is  
> > coming very soon now). I have an organisation of
> N=1,000 approx. It  
> > is most likely to be chopped into three.
> >
> > p.s. I'm not selling his approach or methods or
> theory -- I'm  
> > testing it (a) in practice at work; and (b) in theory
> here with the  
> > VSM. Whereas VSM is a 'dead duck' in respect
> to local  management  
> > interest Snowden's approach is rapidly gaining
> traction. I see his  
> > SenseMaker primarily as a S3* tool -- but it also has
> wider  
> > application I think. I have just had two university
> schools (one  
> > business management/leadership and the other
> Sustainability policy  
> > and practice) become quite interested in his
> SenseMaker as a  
> > research tool.
> >
> > Oh, I should add, he has a following as well! ... ;-)
> >
> > If you want some samples of him speaking then try
> here: http://www.cognitive-edge.com/podcasts.php
> >
> > --- end of discursive field notes -----
> >
> >
> >
> > --- On Sat, 25/10/08, Roger Harnden
> <[log in to unmask]>  
> > wrote:
> >
> > From: Roger Harnden
> <[log in to unmask]>
> > Subject: Re: Wikipedia and the Meaning of Truth
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Received: Saturday, 25 October, 2008, 2:59 AM
> >
> > Russell.
> >
> >
> > I'm missing out somewhere. What is the 'Dave
> Snowden' stuff??
> >
> >
> > Roger
> >
> > On 24 Oct 2008, at 14:24, R Clemens wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yes, I am still writing out my 10,000 lines on the
> blackboard:  
> > "Discursive is bad!" ... Not sure it's
> going to work though ... ;-)p
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > What Frank wrote, I responded to. What he meant, I can
> only surmise.  
> > Whether it reflects Bloor, I can only take his
> opinion.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- WARNING: Do Not Read Further If You Wish To Avoid
> Discursiveness  
> > ---
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Reliable Knowledge: “Statements about truth must be
> viewed  
> > skeptically. Rather than state something as
> "true," the following  
> > phrase should be used: "On the evidence available
> today the balance  
> > of probability favors the view that...".” ( V.
> Gordon Childe, Man  
> > Makes Himself, 1936)
> >
> >
> >
> > Religious meaning of knowledge: “The Old
> Testament's Tree of  
> > Knowledge of Good and Evil contained the knowledge
> that separated  
> > Man from God: "And the LORD God said, Behold, the
> man is become as  
> > one of us, to know good and evil… " (Genesis
> 3:22)”
> >
> >
> >
> > (Source: both in
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Why am I there in the Wiki? Well it’s a story for
> another time  
> > perhaps, but, in short, well medium-long, I’ve just
> spent a busy day  
> > studying a strange complex species called “Dave
> Snowden” at work in  
> > the field – hence arriving at “Knowledge
> Management” is the same  
> > Wiki-reference area to quotes above (while I read this
> email from  
> > Frank).
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > In my opinion, what Snowden is doing is 100%
> cybernetics (as per  
> > autopoietic definition explained to me by Luc) and his
> approach –  
> > including SenseMaker – is one very powerful tool to
> use. Watch this  
> > space!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I believe it can cover audit/feedback, boundaries (or
> lack of them),  
> > algedonic links (which he calls disintermediation),
> homeostatic  
> > balance, and inter-recursive level communications
> issues. In fact,  
> > where as VSM gives an x-ray view, Snowden’s
> complexity approach is  
> > very much a ‘Blackbox’ paradigm – and management
> are getting very  
> > excited about it. Ultimately it is second order
> cybernetics applied  
> > to governance praxis. In short, he claims to synergise
> quantitative  
> > and qualitative methods and data – I think
> effectively.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > In a note to Angela I said: “There are some identity
> issues between  
> > SB [ Stafford ] & DS which are natural and
> expected (and explained  
> > in VSM and other models/frameworks).  But this should
> be celebrated,  
> > not seen as a problem. If SB was the "most viable
> system" someone  
> > knew -- then I'd say DS must be one of the most
> ‘SB’ characters I  
> > know (without actually knowing SB -- rather by sensing
> from reading  
> > and Metaphorum derived insight).
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > If, I’m wrong then shoot me. Now back to the
> blackboard….
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -- End of Discursiveness --- 
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- On Fri, 24/10/08, Roger Harnden
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > From: Roger Harnden <[log in to unmask]>
> > Subject: Re: Wikipedia and the Meaning of Truth
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Received: Friday, 24 October, 2008, 10:45 PM
> >
> > Frank, take no notice of Russell - he lives  down
> under - probably  
> > in the outback  - so all he understands are
> 'walkabouts' (including  
> > those to the pub, if my memory is correct!).
> >
> >
> > Serious point. If you look below, I don't think
> Frank actually said  
> > such an  absolute statement. IHe is summarising his
> understanding of  
> > a thesis - indeed, from the look of it (I don't
> know the book) quite  
> > a sensible one.
> >
> >
> > It is interesting how many of these discussions circle
> round  
> > (without explicitly acknowledging that they do  the
> objectivist/ 
> > relativist debates.
> >
> >
> > The thing I keep trying to say - albeit clumsily - is
> that I feel  
> > that insights of cybernetic thinking and analysis
> overcomes many of  
> > the problems that can dog so-called
> 'post-modernist' discourse.
> >
> >
> > Roger
> >
> >
> > PS Russell, in the light of one or two previous
> irritated comments,  
> > I have to say I feel we are both behaving quite well
> about keeping  
> > stuff  terse!
> >
> >
> > On 24 Oct 2008, at 11:46, Frank wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Ha ha point taken! Sloppy thinking on my part.
> Nonetheless Bloor  
> > makes some interesting points.
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >
> > Frank Wood
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >
> > From: R Clemens
> >
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> >
> > Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 11:34 AM
> >
> > Subject: Re: Wikipedia and the Meaning of Truth
> >
> >
> > Re: David Bloor
> >
> > The problem I have with these absolutist statements
> "... there is no  
> > such thing as absolute truth .. " is they are
> self contradictory.
> >
> > I once sat through 20 minutes of indoctrination (1:1)
> by a supposed  
> > policy expert who's thesis was "there are no
> facts" -- when she'd  
> > finished I simple asked the obvious question --
> "Is that a fact?"  
> > Session ended rather soon afterwards.
> >
> >
> >
> > --- On Fri, 24/10/08, Frank
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > From: Frank <[log in to unmask]>
> > Subject: Re: Wikipedia and the Meaning of Truth
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Received: Friday, 24 October, 2008, 8:58 PM
> >
> > Just seen the error that Barry made so don't have
> to make the  
> > correction now :-)
> >
> >
> > Kenneth Patchen said in his novel The Journal of
> Albion Moonlight "I  
> > do not choose my truths." I disagree. I think we
> choose our truths  
> > in the light of our culture and the paradigm of our
> times.
> >
> >
> > This is the point David Bloor made in his book
> "Knowledge and Social  
> > Imagery". My interpretation of what he said is
> that there is no such  
> > thing as absolute truth and that truth is dependent on
> the ongoing  
> > paradigm and nothing changes until the paradigm is
> broken and then  
> > the paradigm breakers set up the new paradigm.
> >
> >
> > His section The Popper-Kuhn Debate  is an interesting
> discussion on  
> > truth and the nature of facts.
> >
> >
> > This is a good overview of Bloor's stance.
> >
> >
> >
> http://www.iit.edu/~schmaus/Science_and_Values/notes/sociologists/social.pdf
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >
> > Frank Wood
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >
> > From: BARRY A CLEMSON
> >
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> >
> > Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2008 6:27 PM
> >
> > Subject: Re: Wikipedia and the Meaning of Truth
> >
> >
> > Stefan,
> >
> >
> > Thank  you. It is no wonder I was confused, I
> didn't see the article  
> > by Simson L Garfinkel and I thought you were talking
> about Frank.
> >
> >
> > Barry
> >
> > On Oct 23, 2008, at 1:01 PM, Stefan Wasilewski wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Barry (and Frank)
> >
> >
> > I was addressing the article of Simson L. Garfinkel
> itself and not  
> > Frank at all, having read the whole thing and the
> result was my  
> > thoughts as below.
> >
> >
> > I believe Roger replied and I agree with him (and
> Frank) but to  
> > reply to your thought, we should always go into
> something with the  
> > idea of verifying what we read.
> >
> >
> > Garfinkel is Navy and framed by his environment and
> this was my  
> > thrust in your point 3. I'm old enough to remember
> being behind the  
> > 'Wall' for long periods and talking to those
> of my age that sought  
> > 'truth' but who were open enough to question
> what was said all along  
> > the way: This attitude stayed with me.
> >
> >
> > Of the times I've had discussion with Frank it was
> always clear,  
> > interesting and thought provoking, I seldom now
> respond to anything  
> > other.
> >
> >
> > Hope this helps
> >
> >
> > Stefan
> >
> >
> >
> > On 23 Oct 2008, at 16:46, BARRY A CLEMSON wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Stefan,
> >
> >
> > I find your comments puzzling and would like
> clarification.
> >
> >
> > 1) It seems to me that you are saying that Frank has a
> grudge -- is  
> > this correct? I found his piece to be a thoughtful
> critique that  
> > also was quite supportive of Wikipedia.
> >
> >
> > 2) You say (and I agree) it is up to each of us to
> verify the facts  
> > we seek. What Frank pointed out very nicely is that we
> might be  
> > blindsided by our unexamined assumptions. And if we
> are not even  
> > aware of our assumptions (which is often the case) we
> are quite  
> > thoroughly trapped by them and unable to check our
> facts.
> >
> >
> > 3) i saw no hint of a suggestion to prefer "the
> current filtering of  
> > information and the writing of history by the
> winners". Rather I saw  
> > support for Wikipedia. Where did this come from?
> >
> >
> > 4) Perhaps I am merely clueless but I don't see
> how his specific  
> > profession provides any clue to his viewpoint.
> >
> >
> > Please help me out here.
> >
> >
> > Barry
> >
> >
> >
> > On Oct 23, 2008, at 11:01 AM, Stefan Wasilewski wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I generally find that people who criticise but
> don't offer an  
> > alternative have a grudge and therefore to be put in
> one box to be  
> > balanced as others are likewise accessed.
> >
> >
> > Surely it's up to each and every one of us to
> verify the facts we  
> > seek and in doing so learn accordingly: Nothing should
> be taken on  
> > face value.
> >
> >
> > Would he prefer the current filtering of information
> and the writing  
> > of history by the winners to remain as our only
> sources?
> >
> >
> > His profession should give a clue to viewpoint.
> >
> >
> > Stefan
> >
> >
> > On 23 Oct 2008, at 13:24, Frank wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear Listm
> >
> >
> http://www.technologyreview.com/web/21558/?nlid=1452&a=f
> >
> >
> > Any comments?
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >
> > Frank Wood
> >
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go
> to:www.platformforchange.org 
> >  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at -
> https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at -
> http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to: www.metaphorum.orgFor the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.org 
> >  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at -
> https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at
> -http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> > 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> >
> > ===================================================
> >
> >
> > BARRY A CLEMSON
> >
> > [log in to unmask]
> >
> >
> > 757-692-6673
> >
> >
> > Cybernetica Press at www.cyberneticapress.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "It's not how much you do - it's how much
> love you put in it.... Do  
> > small things with great love."
> >
> >             --- Mother Teresa ---
> >
> >
> > The true warrior may be killed, but he can not be
> defeated.
> >
> >    --- my paraphrase of Sensei Hamada ---
> >
> >
> > And peace rolled down like a mighty river.
> >
> >        -- Inspired by the prophet Amos 5:24--
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to: www.metaphorum.orgFor the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.org 
> >  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at -
> https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at
> -http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> > 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.org 
> >  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at -
> https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at
> -http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> > 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> >
> > ===================================================
> >
> >
> > BARRY A CLEMSON
> >
> > [log in to unmask]
> >
> >
> > 757-692-6673
> >
> >
> > Cybernetica Press at www.cyberneticapress.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "It's not how much you do - it's how much
> love you put in it.... Do  
> > small things with great love."
> >
> >             --- Mother Teresa ---
> >
> >
> > The true warrior may be killed, but he can not be
> defeated.
> >
> >    --- my paraphrase of Sensei Hamada ---
> >
> >
> > And peace rolled down like a mighty river.
> >
> >        -- Inspired by the prophet Amos 5:24--
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.
> >
> > Virus Database (VPS): 081023-0, 23/10/2008
> > Tested on: 24/10/2008 10:35:50
> > avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2008 ALWIL Software.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.org 
> >  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at -
> https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at
> -http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> > 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.org 
> >  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at
> -https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at -
> http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> > Make the switch to the world's best email. Get
> Yahoo!7 Mail.  
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.orgMETAPHORUM 
> >  eList Archive available at -
> https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at
> -http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> > 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.org 
> >  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at
> -https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at -
> http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.org 
> >  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at -
> https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at -
> http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> > 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> > Make the switch to the world's best email. Get
> Yahoo!7 Mail.  
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to:www.metaphorum.org For the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.org 
> >  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at
> -https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at -
> http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.org 
> >  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at -
> https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at -
> http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> > 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> > Make the switch to the world's best email. Get
> Yahoo!7 Mail.
> >
> >
> > Make the switch to the world's best email. Get
> Yahoo!7 Mail.  
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to:www.metaphorum.org For the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.org 
> >  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at
> -https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at -
> http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> > This message and attachment(s) are intended solely for
> use by the  
> > addressee and may contain information that is
> privileged,  
> > confidential or otherwise exempt from disclosure under
> applicable  
> > law. If you are not the intended recipient or agent
> thereof  
> > responsible for delivering this message to the
> intended recipient,  
> > you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or  
> > copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
> If you have  
> > received this communication in error, please notify
> the sender  
> > immediately by telephone and with a 'reply'
> message. Thank you for  
> > your co-operation.  
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to:www.metaphorum.org For the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.org 
> >  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at
> -https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at -
> http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> > Make the switch to the world's best email. Get
> Yahoo!7 Mail.  
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to:www.metaphorum.org For the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.org 
> >  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at
> -https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at -
> http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> > This message and attachment(s) are intended solely for
> use by the  
> > addressee and may contain information that is
> privileged,  
> > confidential or otherwise exempt from disclosure under
> applicable  
> > law. If you are not the intended recipient or agent
> thereof  
> > responsible for delivering this message to the
> intended recipient,  
> > you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or  
> > copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
> If you have  
> > received this communication in error, please notify
> the sender  
> > immediately by telephone and with a 'reply'
> message. Thank you for  
> > your co-operation.
> >
> >
> >
> > Make the switch to the world's best email. Get
> Yahoo!7 Mail.
> >
> >
> >
> > Search 1000's of available singles in your area at
> the new Yahoo!7  
> > Dating. Get Started.  
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.org 
> >  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at -
> https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at -
> http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> > This message and attachment(s) are intended solely for
> use by the  
> > addressee and may contain information that is
> privileged,  
> > confidential or otherwise exempt from disclosure under
> applicable  
> > law. If you are not the intended recipient or agent
> thereof  
> > responsible for delivering this message to the
> intended recipient,  
> > you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or  
> > copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
> If you have  
> > received this communication in error, please notify
> the sender  
> > immediately by telephone and with a 'reply'
> message. Thank you for  
> > your co-operation.
> >
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.org 
> >  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at -
> https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at -
> http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> > 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.org 
> >  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at -
> https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at -
> http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> > 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> > All new Yahoo! Mail - Get a sneak peak at messages
> with a handy  
> > reading pane.
> >
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.orgMETAPHORUM 
> >  eList Archive available at -
> https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at -
> http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>  
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.org 
> >  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at -
> https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at
> -http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> > 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > Search 1000's of available singles in your area at
> the new Yahoo!7  
> > Dating. Get Started.  
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.org 
> >  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at
> -https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at -
> http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!
>  
> >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For  
> > more information go to: www.metaphorum.org For the
> Metaphorum  
> > Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:
> www.platformforchange.org 
> >  METAPHORUM eList Archive available at -
> https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html 
> >  Archive of CYBCOM eList available at
> -http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html 
> > 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> 
> 
> ===================================================
> 
> BARRY A CLEMSON
> [log in to unmask]
> 
> 757-692-6673
> 
> Cybernetica Press at www.cyberneticapress.com
> 
> 
> 
> "It's not how much you do - it's how much love
> you put in it.... Do  
> small things with great love."
>              --- Mother Teresa ---
> 
> The true warrior may be killed, but he can not be defeated.
>     --- my paraphrase of Sensei Hamada ---
> 
> And peace rolled down like a mighty river.
>         -- Inspired by the prophet Amos 5:24--
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> For more information go to: www.metaphorum.org
> 
> For the Metaphorum Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE)
> go to:  www.platformforchange.org
> 
> METAPHORUM eList Archive available at -
> https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html
> 
> Archive of CYBCOM eList available at -
> http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


      

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For more information go to: www.metaphorum.org

For the Metaphorum Collaborative Working Environment (MCWE) go to:  www.platformforchange.org

METAPHORUM eList Archive available at - https://listserv.heanet.ie/ucd-staffordbeer.html

Archive of CYBCOM eList available at - http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/archives/cybcom.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

September 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
August 2017
May 2017
November 2016
October 2016
July 2016
June 2016
March 2016
November 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.HEANET.IE

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager