Will I shut up?

Mr Fortuner connection modem fortuner at MATH.U-BORDEAUX.FR
Fri Mar 31 08:11:25 CST 1995

Mike Ivie attributes the flurry of unsubscribers in part to:
the rather
self-serving "my program is better than yours because I have more obtuse
reasoning" discussion.

Self serving? Of course it is, and what's wrong with
that? When someone creates something, it is because he believes that his stuff
is better than the existing stuff, and he wants other people to notice

The other reason of comparing points of views is that you always learn
from what the other fellow says. Mike Dallwith comments have forced me to
precise my views on several points. It is well known that a brainstorming
group will come up with better solutions than a guy thinking in isolation. I
thought this was the purpose of discussion groups like Taxacom: to allow
members to brainstorm on a question. Now, maybe I am sending this to the wrong
group. Maybe Taxacom is for pure taxonomy only and lowly identification not

If identification is an accepted subject of discussion, then you
must admit that some of the points I am arguing with Mike Dallwitz (is
dichotomy alone sufficient for good identification; is it possible to add a
new state without redefining the list of characters) are basic to the subject.

This being said, I'll wait for the reactions to Mike Ivie's motion.

Fortuner, Identificator
fortuner at math.u-bordeaux.fr

PS: I repeat what I was
asking in my last message: does anyone know of a journal that would be
interested in a paper on identification characters?

More information about the Taxacom mailing list