On Sat, 13 Jul 2002, J C Lawrence wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Jul 2002 13:35:54 -0700
> J C Lawrence <claw@kanga.nu> wrote:
>
> > They're social systems in exactly the same way that social
> > groups that go lunch together form at work places.
>
> And the other bit which is interesting here is how those social
> and cultural definitions define the population of the lists both
> in terms of base membership and in terms of those who post and
> those who lurk (or cease lurking) within the base membership.
(snip)
> Social groups, they're enough to make you tear your hair out.
Well, there's an angle that should really appeal to this
group: Languages, certainly, and probably group formation as well,
are not hardwired into the brain -- but the predisposition to learn
(at least one) language pretty surely is; and so methinks is the
predisposition to form gangs, cliques, etc. More: experience
suggests that any well-defined group will eventually discover
itself to be an elite ... And here we're into computer
architecture imitating life, or something like that .... <grin>
--
RR 'Beartooth' Neuswanger <karhunhammas (at) lserv.com>
double retiree, erstwhile philologist & library cataloger,
computer user ad extremis
Follow-Ups:
References:
|
|
