Re: Signal-To-Noise Reduction. :)

[Bowie Poag <bjp primenet com>]

> Making an official split would not be practical I think. A compromise is
> necessary. The intended goals are the same. But the 'noise' should go.

Tom has been offered his own mailing list, and webspace to develop his
project. He's also been offered the option to come here and advertise for
subscribers as much as he likes. He hasn't done any of the three things.
I think of Tom were actually serious about developing the RSG, he's be
jumping at the chance to make use of the resources offered to him. He
isnt.

> For as far as Bowie hasn't done this already.. It should be done (IMHO).
> Anything usefull in the RSG should wind up in the UISG.

Oh, I agree.. Its just there isnt much in the RSG thats of any qualitative
use in the UISG framework. Tom's is continuing to develop an inconsistant
document.  The UISG wants *no part* of that.. So our options are limited
when it comes to gleaning information from it. If we take one part, we
must then take other smaller parts which go along with it. The end result
is, the UISG begins to be built in a direction which it shouldnt be going
in. We dont want that--And integration of the two isnt the solution.

Its a null issue, as far as i'm concerned, personally. The more Tom
develops the RSG, the further and further away it goes from our target
goal. The more and more inconsistant it becomes, and the less and less
likely it is to have any portion of it included into the UISG framework.


Bowie