Print

Print



Harold et al 
(cc: Dave Snowden)


(sorry its long but technology
limitations …!)

 

My thoughts to date in very
summarised brain dump format: (I’ll just us ‘DS’ and ‘SB’ as shorthand. Not
meant to be definitive – rather to stimulate thought and reflection.

 

1.     
DS
disintermediation is recursive issue but taken to extremes. It also relates
to SB algedonic but perhaps seen as bidirectional. Whereas SB VSM implies 1:1
from S1 to S5, DS may be seen (in praxis) as N:N or perhaps N:1 where multiple
fragments are assembled (attenuated) into rich pictures (abstractions) for S5
appreciation. That emergence (of meaning) in itself is recursiveness in nature
I think. Remembering DS is Knowledge mgt then action can praxis if there is
theory to guide it – SB is one such theory. SB would I think claim it is a
naturalised theory.

2.     
Span of control
– this starts to lose the classical circa n=6 as we approach quantum dynamics
of certain environments. I’m not sure whether DS and/or SB think they apply to
‘reality’ – I myself feel that complexity is more a case of mental overload to un-attenuated variety
due in part to inappropriate model/s. However DS has his complex adaptive
systems (CAS) definitions that are at least circular enough to encompass
organic life (autopoiesis) and possible some inorganic human systems joined up
way past their safety levels. In short, using the SenseMaker tools and the
Cynefin framework may mean rewriting the traditional heuristics on span of
control which I think heavily underpin VSM logic. 

3.     
Distributed
cognition – this is surely similar to the VSM in principle. SB goes one
further in that this distribution of cognition is influenced by the context of
operational diversity – i.e. S5 through S1.

4.     
Possible inter-alignments:

a.      
S4 (external environment) == Cynefin framework +
SenseMaker tool set.

b.     
S3* Audit/feedback == SenseMaker tool set

c.      
Algedonic (instinctive
pain/pleasure channel) == bidirectional. [SB implies production model with ‘red
button’ signal sent to control centre. DS allows for micro fragments at scale
(s1) to assemble for S3/S5 such that action can be taken – hopefully not
shooting innocent people on trains! Perhaps the problem is when S3 takes action
on trains without counter balance of S4 (or vice versa). Red button vs Red
flag. 

d.     
S2 (regulation
internal) == I think this area of operations is most comfortable in the simple/ordered
world and without conceptual or procedural layers of protection very quickly
either dominates everything (we have just been there) or is overwhelmed and we
cannot get paid of fly safely.  Not sure
where DS fits in per se, but I assume knowledge is filtered to such operating
systems in appropriate manner. I think that is assumed as well in DS approach.
How this aught to be done may be a role for VSM?

e.      
S5-s1 == this is either direct disintermediated
algedonic (s1-S5) or bureaucratic (S2,S3,S3*,S4,S5) depending on context that
can be appreciated through Cynefin framework.

f.      
S3 (operation
mgt/directorate) ==  complex –
complicated

g.     
S4 (env, futures
directorate) == chaos – complex – complicated

h.     
S3* (audit/feedback)
== SenseMaker is a shared tool for internal (S3*/S3) and external (S4) domains.
Could also be a communications tool for S4-S5 and S4-S3. As said elsewhere, the
practical use of this tool starts to diminish VSM metasystem logical
distinctions (as in Relativity over Newtonian) – but this praxis does not
invalidate the VSM conceptual domains – in fact the VSM can help maintain sense
of accountability in role. DS ‘crew’ concepts presuppose ordered chains of
command which are equivalent VSM paradigm.

i.       
Haemostat ==
as per above, Cynefin provides some orientation at S5 (to know what context
problem situations are in) and SenseMaker provides the disintermendiated
communications tool for S4-S5-S3 dynamic. But DS is less clear (to me) on
determining requisite S4 vs S3 balance perspective. It appears neutral –
neither assisting nor hampering what is.

j.       
DS = action based on knowledge (information derived and
assembled). 

k.     
SB = VSM theory based on information?? [could be on a
limb here?]

l.       
VSM is engineer’s view of the car == DS is driver’s
view of the car. 

m.   
 SB using
mechanical system universe model == DS using organic cognitive model.

 

5.     
The question is how their functioning (as models and
tool) can be appreciated in the practical world – i.e. to Vickers’ “Rocking
Boat” and as a Singerian enquiring
system. (e.g. Checkland 1981, p. 264)

6.     
“What model of social reality is implied by the
methodology?” (Ibid) and one might add “the methods and tools?”.

7.     
Analogy – using the internet? == SB/VSB at the level of
emails and Listservers. DS at the level of blogs and You Tube. Where is
business going? Ergo … ? Evidence supports this view. 

8.     
In summary, I think DS tools and framework are
extremely applicable to Checkland’s Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) by way of
forming (and reforming) rich pictures (albeit abstract 3D representations) and
hypothesis from these.

9.     
Boundaries –
the DS Cyefin provides conceptual boundaries for environmental (situational)
context appreciation via four windows. Already variety is increasing to govern
variety. SB also provides conceptual boundaries via VSM. Both are diagnostic
tools. DS has s/w tools to complement. VSM is orientated towards theory and
insight. DS is orientated towards engagement and reflexive (safe/fail) action. Both
are organically grounded in experiment and theory and can be coupled via respect
for S5 need for identity and policy and governance praxis. 

10.  Ethics – this is one area of distinction
(albeit my knowledge is incomplete). SB embraces viability and eudemony as
highest ideal outcome/impact (indicator) and has stated that VSM should not be
deployed in tyrannical States – e.g. shutdown in Chile circa 1973.  SB rather silent on this (but working on it I
understand) and in fact s/w has emerged from covert surveillance theatres (as
did the internet I might add!). 

11.  Gubernation (emergent democratic governance)
== both seem applicable without clash or symbiotic disharmony. For example VSM
has been of interest to activist organisations such as GetUp.Org, and possible
Avaaz in the future. DS approach could equally apply with the added benefit
that deployment of plug-in features could add 2nd order cybernetic
features to blogging etc. 



(eom) 



--- 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, 9:04 PM



 
Dave,
 
Thanks for the quick reply.
 
I think emergence is present in the VSM, but it is hardly 
discussed lately. I thing that viable organizations can have aspects of all four 
domains of Cynefin. You are right when saying the lots of them will fall in the 
complicated domain (how to find what is known, learn/improve together, COP's 
etc), others fall into the "operational domain": daily routine in production or 
service operations f.e. Even the chaos domain can have its merits for 
organizations from time to time allthough few will see it that way. And indeed, 
high levels of "fever" can only exits for a limited period else death will 
follow. The complex domain in my view has most to do with the System IV (four) 
in the VSM, be it that Fail-Save approached are rarely (or to implicetely for 
me?) advocated in the VSM groups. Please note this is my impression/observation. 
I'm not blaming anyone ....
 
The discussion in the thread was about the nestedness of 
the VSM and where this is related to / found in / relevent for the Cynefin 
model. Cynefin in my view is not an organization model, but a sense-making 
framework and so I expect Cynefin to mean something for working with 
the VSM in real situations, but I do not expect the idea of nestedness 
coming out of Cynefin automagically. The question however is interesting: how 
does "Cynefin inspired sense-making" lead to nestedness in organization. It 
seems common sense, but that seems a rare good today.
 
Harold


  
  
  From: Snowden Dave 
  [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
Sent: maandag 27 oktober 
  2008 10:50
To: Garderen, Harold van
Cc: 
  [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]
Subject: 
  Re: Snowden


  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. 

 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&#39;s best email. Get Yahoo!7 Mail! http://au.yahoo.com/y7mail

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~