Re: Once again my opponents form a circular firing squad

--- In crazy_music@y..., xed@e... wrote:
> FROM: mclaren
<big ol'snip>
> Jeff Scott averred that "the purpose of
> discussion is to convince people." C'mon, Jeff,
> wake up. Smell the latte. On the internet no
> one is ever convinced of anything, they're all
> kooks and cranks and flakes looking for converts
> for their musical cult religions. Very few
> people on the internet care about discussing
> *anything* -- for most of these kooks and cranks
> and flakes, it's nothing but an eternal on-line
> jihad on behalf of their cult guru (Schoenberg,
> Partch, Pythagoras, Rameau, whoever).

There is a lot of kookery, but the internet as it was originally, a
medium for researchers to share data and information, still exists.
Witness such groups as sci.math.research, sci.physics.research,
the xxx.lanl.gov preprint archives, numerous expository pages on
string theory general relativity, etc. There is a lot of really top
notch scholarship out there, although the signal to noise ratio is
very low. Actually, this group is a little like the xxx preprint
archives. Preliminary work is submitted for review and comment, ideas
are discussed, and sometimes, yes, people are convinced.

> And THIS is the brain of the planet?
> No, the internet isn't the brain of the planet...
> it's another part of the planet, at the opposite
> end of the body.

It depends on where you look. Besides looking for new and interesting
music, I mostly use the internet for research, and for me, there are
great resources. You just have to be discriminating. Unfortunately, if
you don't already know something about a subject, it is easy to be
decieved.

> ---------
> --mclaren

John Starrett