Replying to LO25778 --
Hello dear Denham and other curious Normans,
Nice meme. Things are not black or white ;-). There is nothing new under
the sun - wonder who wrote what?
Cyberspace is inside our heads as much as it is outside. Inside there are
these thinks*, (our thoughts, feelings, notions, action) being posted all
the time, wanting, striving, competing for the number one seat: concious
recognition. And then what? Survival of the best adapted means just more
attention. The processes of getting attention changes the think. Then the
attention is shifted to other thinks*. It is the same with the outside
thinkerings*, being posted all the time. Not only here, in the LO-cycles,
but also in books, on television, on the walls and billboards. Some of
these survivors have become so "smart" that they remain for a longer time
in the attentionsphere. Who has read the works by J.C. van Marken lately?
See what i mean.
Evolving = informing. e-Volving = in-forming. Evolution informs,
incorprates information, data, genes and memes. Genes gene-rate
generations. Who cares? Memes meme-orate informations. Informemations.
Inform meme mations. Where is the meaning of life? It is an "oratio pro
domo". Evolving information, informing evolution. Form follows function,
remember? The function of the form is to follow. Involving = e-formation.
Mutating metafore, mutating inforemation, forming mutating, metating
meta-ting. Remember this, a kiss is just a kiss. Is there anybody out
there? Learning. As i see things: the process of living: replicating
information about living. Information preys (praise) on information. The
surviving pieces of information meet, meat is meme info, spam is processed
meat, informeation, meet information. Who said, play it again Sam?
Denham Grey wrote:
> As I wander around deep cyberspace, I wonder about the ethics and dynamics
> of posting almost the same idea in many communities within a short span of
> time (meme spam)
What has ethics to do with it? If the idea survives it is ethical. If not,
also. I could agree that the whole process of creating and destroying
ideas is unethical, but this would imply that life is unethical, which is
clearly either an understatement or plainly untrue.
> Will this help with cross pollination?, build synergy?, increase
> innovation? and result in new thoughts? or will it reduce the conceptual
> entropy, pollute the ether and bring to a halt the semantic and ideologic
> drift that drives cognition in virtual space?.
A bit in both. There seems to be a b in both - or is there already a b in be?
> Not an easy call. When should I take my meme and thrust, (inflict?)
> (entrust?) it upon (to) another audience and gathering?.
you already did. See, no ethics involved, no hands either, no tricks. I
like the use of the word call in this meme. In fact, this generated my
response. Not an easy call.
> When do I add and when do I destroy?
On adding one thought, thousands are destroyed. So it goes. An anecdote:
Years ago i worked with a large firm on a small project. It involved
continuous improvement. Mimes like JIT, TQM, ERP, even ICT, i see
technology. I noted that every good idea, every improvement had been
posted (said, noted, published, called) at least three times (true, make
that a thousand times). There is no shortgae of ideas, suggestions,
meaning, contributions. So it seemed to go: it is not the idea, not the
meme that poses a problem, it is the audience, the gathering, the field
that is. many are called, but few respond. So it goes.
> By gathering the fruits of past drift and spreading those concepts, do I
> wreck future opportunity for reaping hybrid vigor?
yes and please continue.
> Contrast this with surfacing a past thought from a persistent
> conversation, bringing it into a changed context within the SAME
> community, allowing 'new' participants the opportunity to gain synergy.
No (wo)man converses with the SAME community twice. Conversation changed
the community. Look, there is Heraclites again, a river, a flow, a sea of
thoughts.
> Is this fundamentally different from meme spam??
It depends on your own world, your own cyberspace and when you think it
is, you'll be proved wrong. Adn when you think it isn't, also wrong. You
cannot have your cake without spam and eat it. Spam without spam = spam.
Kind regards, thank you and all the best in the new millennium ( o no, not
that discussion on the beginning of the MMmmillenniummm again...) to you
all,
Jan Lelie
-- Drs J.C. Lelie CPIM (Jan) LOGISENS - Sparring Partner in Logistical Development mind@work - est. 1998 - Group Decision Process Support Mobilé - Performance Improvement Tel.: (+ 31) (0)70 3243475 or car: (+ 31)(0)65 4685114 http://www.mindatwork.nl and/or taoSystems: + 31 (0)30 6377973 - mindatwork@taoNet.nlLearning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.