On Sat, 24 Jun 1995 jack@his.com wrote:
> Replying to LO1747 --
>
> While discussing the need to balance convenience for the list
> administrator with convenience for a user, Jim Michmerhuizen said:
>
> "Threads are an intermediate level of structure. I like them. The name
> of a thread is determined, usually, by its initiator. Threads are
> _concrete_ in a way that mere conceptual systems can never be. When we
> have a hundred simultaneous threads - _that's_ when to call in the
> keywords."
>
> One aspect of the thread issue is: When I am responding to a particular
> posting, but I am digressing in the subject matter, should I maintain the
> thread or start a new one? On this list I have never started a new thread
> while in reply mode, because I thought this would make life a little
> inconvenient for Rick and some users.
I was making a profound philosophical statement under the guise of a simple
practical preference :-) Here it is, reformulated:
The expression we choose to name a thread begins life as a "description".
That is, the expression has some information content even all by itself.
Once the thread is alive and well, however, the name's descriptive value
recedes into the background and will eventually become entirely vestigial.
This is, in fact, how it works for all of us. And that's why, once the
thread is alive, it doesn't matter very much if the actual subject matter
evolves to something quite different from what the threadname,
descriptively construed, would suggest. The participants only use the
name ostensively: "_that_ thread". Lurkers similarly.
Such a system breaks down only if we try to make it serve our need for a
univocal and unambiguous, complete and consistent conceptual classification
scheme. And since I don't believe in such artifacts anymore, I don't
care whether we need them or not.
...and then Rick wrote:
On changing the
> subject line -- Please keep it exactly the same (use cut and paste if
> need be) if you're continuing a thread, change it if you're branching
> significantly. How to tell? You be the judge. I change the subject lines
> sometimes when I think a new branch is being started. --Rick
> -----
Which suggests one final point for this post: isn't this a
PERFECT example of "emergent knowledge"? Threads are an _emergent_ way
of structuring the discussion: they arise from, and are maintained by,
the free and independent judgements of all the participants, including
the moderator.
--
Regards
Jim Michmerhuizen
web residence at http://world.std.com/~jamzen/
...........................................................................
. . . . There are far *fewer* things in heaven and earth, Horatio, . . . .
. . . . . than are dreamt of in your philosophy... . . | _ .