<none>

[Ted Heatherington <THeather -at- ALPHA -dot- CA>]

Stephen,

I've considered it, but could not decide if it should be in a
chronological duration, or simply a count of how many exchanges.  Then
there is the issue of how to resolve digressions which often have a
varied progression (one may be there in 4 messages in a couple hours,
another takes 21 over a week), and then to integrate those who lurk
and then, in a flury of wit, advance/decline the themes in a dozen or
less threads (and their sub-themes)...

Then I considered the notable fact that most of the declines to the
inane are a healthy release of social stress, a protest against
"politically correct" speech and politically incorrect workplaces.
How then do we ascertain the relevance of the decline?

Finally, if the decline is both healthy and a way to avoid getting too
serious about the topic, should we then make it a "task" to determine
how hard we are trying NOT to take it to serious?

Then I got the joke.


Ted Heatherington
Technical Writer,
Alpha Technologies, Canada

-----------------------
>Date:    Wed, 20 Nov 1996 09:49:13 -0600
>From:    Stephen Victor <svictor -at- HOUSTON -dot- GEOQUEST -dot- SLB -dot- COM>
>Subject: Re: One-ups

[snip]

><beavis_&_butthead_mode=ON>

>huh huhuhh huhuh

>He said "up"

>uhuhhhh huhuh huhuhh

><beavis_&_butthead_mode=OFF>

>Has anyone on this list ever timed how long it takes for
>serious discussion of an issue to degenerate into utter inanity?

>--
>Stephen P. Victor                               Phone: (713) 513-2552
>Technical Writer, Software Training             Fax:   (713) 513-2019
>Schlumberger GeoQuest                svictor -at- houston -dot- geoquest -dot- slb -dot- com
>5599 San Felipe, Suite 1700
>Houston, Texas 77056 USA