From: SQUONKSTAIL@aol.com
Date: Sun Jun 29 2003 - 21:44:08 BST
There is such a debate, and I am on DMB's side of it (see my last couple of
posts in which I try to answer your objections). To say that by taking this
position we "don't accept the MOQ" is very strange. Is it your opinion that any
disagreement with Pirsig, even if it is only a matter of terminology, is not to
be allowed? If it is not allowed, how do you allow DQ into the MOQ?
- Scott
Hi Scott,
I feel if Skutvik had left the forum many years ago, the character of the
forum would be more practical and less theoretical. As it is, its full of much
that is almost totally useless - no value to anyone but the members of the
forum? Worse, because it makes others less likely to find practicality away from
the forum.
I single out Skutvik because his tone is very much in evidence in the
archives - he set the tone for years. 'The Skutvik years' of the forum will likely be
his legacy to Humanity.
And the same goes for dmb. After we are all dead and gone, our work will
remain, and if you feel dmb is leaving significant posterity, then i am very happy
about it. A significant posterior perhaps?
If you can be Dynamic - great! I give you my 100% support if you need it. I
can almost guarantee my friend that you have almost no idea just how dynamic
'it' is. I sincerely want to help.
It is real. It is rael.
squonk
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jun 29 2003 - 21:44:44 BST