Superb suggestion, Dave, for the future of MF.
I love the idea of purified Pirsig, straight from the the tap.
By posting a topic the traditional way as we've been doing, the originator
has been blending another static pattern with pure Pirsig.
This approach should be tested.
Yet, also other approaches should be looked into to avoid Pirsigism from
developing. The MoQ is obviously meta-Pirsig and beyond the static patterns
he himself created. Therefore, new static latches have, do, and _will_
emerge through our process of inquiry in all our methods of discuss in this
community (and new methods are being considered).
So, if the community can agree on a new static latch in the form of a
condensed summary (and yes, I do think this is possible to agree) of new
static latches that arise through trial by fire in this community then
those too can follow this format. Perhaps it will be a Buchanism/Horsism/
Bodvarism/etc/etc or it might be a collaborative pattern formed by many
minds (which is always the case regardless), but I'd recommend that this
new static pattern/latch could be presented in the way you describe.
This will allow the MoQ to evolve in a manner consistent with the amount
of attention that is focused on it right now by the collective individuals
in this group and the collective system of thought we create.
--s
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 05:50:08PM -0700, David Buchanan wrote:
> Hello:
>
> If memory serves, I was very excited about the original formation of this
> focused forum. I've just re-subscribed and I'd really hate to see it crash.
> I agree with everyone who wants to converse about the MOQ in a calm, quiet
> space. To focus everyone's attention on one specific issue for an entire
> month can work some powerful magic.
>
> It seems the trick is selecting an issue or asking a question that gets us
> rolling on a topic that's both relevant and specific. For some reason,
> voting on the suggestions doesn't seem to be working. It seems the only
> solution is to give the moderator the authority to decide on topics or to
> pass that responsability around, with each participant taking their turn. In
> either case, the selection of topics is made by an individual instead of a
> committee.
>
> Even back when the MF was fresh and new there were some bad topics. A
> question can be wrong, predicated on a misunderstanding, irrelevant, dull or
> just plain boring. It seems the only solution is to ask no questions,
> especially if the democratic selection process is replaced. I'd like to
> suggest that the topic never include a question, a reference to current
> events, other books or anything else. Instead, we should just select a quote
> from Lila. Don't allow any one question or comment about the quote to
> direct or control the conversation. Just put up some pure Pirsig, a
> paragraph or less. Then all the participants can ask questions about it.
> Anyone can make comments about it or connect it to current events. Everyone
> can look it up and see the Pirsig quote in context. They can submit other
> quotes that seem to support or contradict their interpetations of the quote.
> But by putting up pure Pirsig, we can avoid bad starts. By using LILA
> exclusively, we can focus on the MOQ in a way that leaves no one behind
> because everyone has already read it and has a copy. We can be very specific
> without getting boxed in or trapped by a ill-concieved question.
>
> The one who selects the topic can certainly have questions and current
> events in mind when choosing the quote. For example, if it were my turn to
> pick the topic, I'd find one of Pirsig's statements about Islam's conflict
> with the West. I'd put the quote on the table and just pray that the
> resulting conversation would end up shedding some MOQ light on the 9-11
> attack.
>
> There's my two cents.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:34 BST