Glotmorf on 17 Jul 2003 03:00:01 -0000

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

RE: [spoon-discuss] Re: [Spoon-business] Foomp

On 7/16/03 at 10:44 PM Craig wrote:

>>Question: Should the actual invoking of a state of emergency cancel the
>ongoing recognitions of one?
>NO! The *end* of a state of emergency should cancel the ongoing
>of one.
>Emerge gently.

Well, once a state of emergency is invoked, the Process begins, and either the Process proceeds to the end and the game resumes or the game dies as part of the Process.  What, then, is the distinction between the beginning and the end of a state of emergency with regards to recognition?

I should restate my question in the form of a claim (damn college research class...): If recognitions of states of emergency are not cancelled by the process, either at the beginning or the end or the middle or whatever, a state of emergency will still be recognized by enough people at the end of the Process to trigger a new state of emergency.  I therefore feel the recognitions need to be cancelled by the Process.

So why does it make a difference *where* in the Process?


The Ivory Mini-Tower: a blog study in Social Technology.

spoon-discuss mailing list