Agreed. An interesting thought: if XYZ is here to 'kill' the meme
memetics, s/he would be well served to completely ignore any comments
which indisputably support the meme (thereby increasing its survival
value in the 'meme-pool'). If s/he payed these comments any heed it
would only propagate that idea... the only ideas s/he will propagate
are the ones that s/he thinks can be rendered ineffectual or even
turned back on memetics.
> ("i'm pushing buttons aren't I? I'm getting under your skin
> He he he. I'm the meme of your worst nightmare hehehe.)
The ad hominem drivel gets on my nerves too.
> The problem is not with our definition of memetics or how we are
> talking about it. It has to do with the fact that XYZ is not
> interested in discussing memetics or even developing on the ideas
> posted. S/he wants only to acumulate opponents- no I will not even
> use that word-- an opponent is a worthwile thing-- s/he wants
> whippings boys.
Well.... this is a memetics board, so, to heck with the science of
memes for the time being.... let's analyze the memes of XYZ, shall
we? Obviously the scientific method meme reigns largely (even if
the reigns are mishandled) in XYZ's brain. There may be some sort
of 'fear of being wrong' type of irrational meme in there as well,
which coupled with the highly rational science meme, gives rise to
his/her behavior.
> BTW ( I think I've found out XYZ's real name-- Beavis. "hehehe")
I usually 'laugh' online as: "heheh..." which is also strikingly
Beavis and XYZ like in appearance. Ack!
- JPSchneider
- schneids@centuryinter.net