I keep thinking of putting stones across an area of landscaping I, and
others, always cut across in order to avoid walking the long way
around. Having said that, I don't want to block the other way around


who likes your story

On Wed, Nov 20, 2013, at 12:03 PM, Jim Myers wrote:

Much ado…

I was told a story once (supposedly true) of an architect who was
drawing up plans for a university quadrangle. After construction, when
they began landscaping it was discovered there were no plans for
sidewalks. When the architect was contacted regarding this apparent
oversight, he replied that this was intentional; he wanted to allow
students to begin using the facilities so he could see where they
naturally began creating pathways and use these for determining where
to place sidewalks. Thus the new facility ended up with walks where
they were actually most useful, rather than where someone “thought”
they should be.

I would suggest that we should learn from this tale and suggest we
simply utilize the forms of communication which people are naturally
migrating towards for ‘official’ dissemination of information.
Otherwise this will quickly become ridiculous.


I really don’t give a crap about how long anyone has been online, but
I’ve never understood the rationale behind posting at the bottom of an
email on a discussion list. It makes anyone reading it have to scroll
all the way down to see what you’ve written (as anyone following the
thread has almost certainly already read the previous content). It has
always struck me as counterintuitive and backward. I only know of a
handful of “bottom feeders”, thankfully, but it is pet peeve of mine.
(  ;]  sorry, Hrothgar!)

From: Patrick Anderson [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 11:38 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [CALONTIR] New "Calontir News" mailing list.

In 20+ years of being online, I have found that the concept that
information should be freely available and widely distributed is a Good

Hence, I have found that having a group posting to a group is also a
good thing. If people don't want to read it, they can hit delete. And
since the Yahoo group is going to be not a discussion group, but merely
a dispenser of information group, there's no concern about debate on
that group.

Furthermore, having said that, the concept of official distribution of
information over only an official list versus official information
distributed over unofficial lists is really a pointless discussion. I
have, in my many offices (since we're using chronology to explain
experience) sent information ex officio (or ex cathedra) out to
unofficial lists all the time. There's no real reason for an "official"
source of news when we have a bunch of "unofficial" ones where official
people can distribute information officially. All a separate group does
it make it harder for new people and experienced people to find
official information.

And sorry, Hrothgar, I'm still a top-poster.



Patrick Anderson

[1][log in to unmask]

"No matter how much you feed the wolf,

he keeps looking at the forest." --Ilse Lehiste

Patrick Anderson
[log in to unmask]
"No matter how much you feed the wolf,
he keeps looking at the forest." --Ilse Lehiste


1. mailto:[log in to unmask]