Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 23 Dec 2006 07:37 In article <1166820868.074080.177310(a)73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com>, dwickford(a)yahoo.com wrote: > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> In article <1163509645.701125.130030(a)f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, >> hill(a)rowland.org wrote: >> >hill(a)rowland.org wrote: >> >> Winfield Hill wrote: >> >> > >> >> > 4200 postings and still going strong. Amazing. >> >> >> >> Wow, now 7200 posts and still going strong. And most >> >> of the posts were under the original subject title. This >> >> must be some kind of a record. Certainly it's a stress >> >> test for the Google Groups web-page display code, etc. >> > >> >Amazing, now nearing 9000 posts and still going strong. >> >Furthermore, a subtle point, the posts haven't strayed far >> >from the original post in terms of individual thread-segment >> >lengths, so Google Groups tree view still nicely handles all >> >the pieces in a narrow sidebar. >> >> Really?!!! That's interesting. >> >> > BTW, my own usenet-news >> >server completely lost it on this one long ago. >> >> Do you know why it broke? >> >> /BAH >Sorry about jumping in, but Google groups is having trouble. > >Do they offer scholarships? If not they are wanting their yellow cake >and eating it. The post is also indicitave of grade inlfation. >>Qualified scientists and engineers at the >>Master/Ph.D. level and above are encouraged to apply. >Back when I graduated the MOD/contractors were happy to take graduates >with a bachelors degree. Now the only ones who know how to work are the advanced degrees holders. They've learned how to stay focused on a project even though they're up to their folicles in bits clamoring for attention. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 23 Dec 2006 07:38 In article <458BF7BC.9EC34C5F(a)hotmail.com>, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >> > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >> >> >>hhmmm.....Are we talking about two kinds of leading? >> > >> >No, at most of degrees, but not of separate kinds. >> > >> >> A group of people who sit in the legislature and repeatedly, as a group, >> >>ignore voters' mandates is not leading the voters. >> >> >> >But it certainly does. As I said, it is their will that is being >> >done. That's leading. You may say that this is, in the long run, a >> >less effective way than this of actively convincing the voters to >> >support what the leaders want, that it may eventually backfire etc. >> >etc. Granted. A boss who can manage to convince his underlings to >> >follow his plans enthusiastically is a better boss than the one who >> >just forces them to do it, against their judgement. But both are >> >bosses. >> >> Oh, I see what you're talking about now. Thanks. I was making >> the mistake of excluding those who deal with short-term and >> ignore the long-term side effects. > >No ! > >You're just deluding yourself with the idea that YOU know best ! In some things, I do know best. > >Graham > >Happy Christmas btw ! Same to you. :-) /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 23 Dec 2006 09:42 In article <RzUih.38$i5.173(a)news.uchicago.edu>, mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >In article <emgik5$8ss_002(a)s1015.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >>In article <sYzih.27$i5.77(a)news.uchicago.edu>, >> mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >>>In article <eme5fi$8qk_007(a)s862.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >>>>In article <Isdih.23$i5.100(a)news.uchicago.edu>, >>>> mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >>>>>In article <embl29$8qk_002(a)s1125.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >>>>>>In article <d3c19$4589532d$49ecf11$27638(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >>>>>> unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >>>>>>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>snip >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes. What has been happening in Mass. is that these politicians >>>>>>>> are not honoring the tax mandates we've given them. Only >>>>>>>> time will tell, if our newly elected governor fulfills his >>>>>>>> promise and completely eliminates the property tax mandate >>>>>>>> we passed 20? years ago. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> /BAH >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Sounds like they're leading instead of being obedient employees. >>>>>> >>>>>>No. They are going off into a different direction. There is no >>>>>>leading involved. >>>>>> >>>>>Off course there is. It is their will that is being done. Thus, >>>>>they're leading. Period. >>>> >>>>hhmmm.....Are we talking about two kinds of leading? >>> >>>No, at most of degrees, but not of separate kinds. >>> >>>> A group of people who sit in the legislature and repeatedly, as a group, >>>>ignore voters' mandates is not leading the voters. >>>> >>>But it certainly does. As I said, it is their will that is being >>>done. That's leading. You may say that this is, in the long run, a >>>less effective way than this of actively convincing the voters to >>>support what the leaders want, that it may eventually backfire etc. >>>etc. Granted. A boss who can manage to convince his underlings to >>>follow his plans enthusiastically is a better boss than the one who >>>just forces them to do it, against their judgement. But both are >>>bosses. >> >>Oh, I see what you're talking about now. Thanks. I was making >>the mistake of excluding those who deal with short-term and >>ignore the long-term side effects. >> >Ah, you were confusing "leader" with "good leader". Yes. I don't call the fuckups leaders since they are people I have to work around to get stuff done. > Independent >qualities. One who leads people off a cliff is still a leader if >others follow. hmm...I've been thinking of that particular example very very very often over the past six months....almost daily. /BAH
From: mmeron on 23 Dec 2006 15:21 In article <emjf91$8qk_004(a)s952.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >In article <RzUih.38$i5.173(a)news.uchicago.edu>, > mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >>In article <emgik5$8ss_002(a)s1015.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >>>In article <sYzih.27$i5.77(a)news.uchicago.edu>, >>> mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >>>>In article <eme5fi$8qk_007(a)s862.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >>>>>In article <Isdih.23$i5.100(a)news.uchicago.edu>, >>>>> mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: >>>>>>In article <embl29$8qk_002(a)s1125.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>>>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >>>>>>>In article <d3c19$4589532d$49ecf11$27638(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >>>>>>> unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>snip >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yes. What has been happening in Mass. is that these politicians >>>>>>>>> are not honoring the tax mandates we've given them. Only >>>>>>>>> time will tell, if our newly elected governor fulfills his >>>>>>>>> promise and completely eliminates the property tax mandate >>>>>>>>> we passed 20? years ago. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> /BAH >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Sounds like they're leading instead of being obedient employees. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>No. They are going off into a different direction. There is no >>>>>>>leading involved. >>>>>>> >>>>>>Off course there is. It is their will that is being done. Thus, >>>>>>they're leading. Period. >>>>> >>>>>hhmmm.....Are we talking about two kinds of leading? >>>> >>>>No, at most of degrees, but not of separate kinds. >>>> >>>>> A group of people who sit in the legislature and repeatedly, as a group, >>>>>ignore voters' mandates is not leading the voters. >>>>> >>>>But it certainly does. As I said, it is their will that is being >>>>done. That's leading. You may say that this is, in the long run, a >>>>less effective way than this of actively convincing the voters to >>>>support what the leaders want, that it may eventually backfire etc. >>>>etc. Granted. A boss who can manage to convince his underlings to >>>>follow his plans enthusiastically is a better boss than the one who >>>>just forces them to do it, against their judgement. But both are >>>>bosses. >>> >>>Oh, I see what you're talking about now. Thanks. I was making >>>the mistake of excluding those who deal with short-term and >>>ignore the long-term side effects. >>> >>Ah, you were confusing "leader" with "good leader". > >Yes. I don't call the fuckups leaders since they are >people I have to work around to get stuff done. Words have meanings. If you endow them with additional meanings beyond those imbedded in them, you'll find your communication greatly hampered. A house is a house, whether you approve of the floor plan or not. A computer program is a computer program, whether it is good or crappy. And a leader is a leader whether he is a fuckup or not. The word "leader" by itself is a description of function, that's all, it doesn't, apriori, convey any positive or negative connotations. If you want to add such connotations, hey, that's what adjectives are for. It can be "good leader", "fuckup leader", "wise leader", "dumb leader", whatever. > >> Independent >>qualities. One who leads people off a cliff is still a leader if >>others follow. > >hmm...I've been thinking of that particular example very very very >often over the past six months....almost daily. > Oh, yes, I know. Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool, meron(a)cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
From: unsettled on 24 Dec 2006 14:50
mmeron(a)cars3.uchicago.edu wrote: > In article <emjf91$8qk_004(a)s952.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com writes: >>Yes. I don't call the fuckups leaders since they are >>people I have to work around to get stuff done. > Words have meanings. If you endow them with additional meanings beyond > those imbedded in them, you'll find your communication greatly > hampered. A house is a house, whether you approve of the floor plan > or not. A computer program is a computer program, whether it is good > or crappy. And a leader is a leader whether he is a fuckup or not. > The word "leader" by itself is a description of function, that's all, > it doesn't, apriori, convey any positive or negative connotations. If > you want to add such connotations, hey, that's what adjectives are > for. It can be "good leader", "fuckup leader", "wise leader", "dumb > leader", whatever. >>>Independent >>>qualities. One who leads people off a cliff is still a leader if >>>others follow. >>hmm...I've been thinking of that particular example very very very >>often over the past six months....almost daily. > Oh, yes, I know. I've taken a look at older BAH posts. It looks like this latest is no departure from her history. I don't think the difficulty is one of "additional meanings" so much as that of a completely self-referential worldview. |