wwp@yahoogroups.com:
Re: Globorama
Eduardo Hutter 2008-May-27 01:43:00
Hi Caroling,
I'm not speaking FOR anybody since I'm clearly not contacting the ZKM
institute to grant them permission for your or anybody else's work. I
spoke TO THE LIST what I think would benefit the members. I was speaking
to you, not on your behalf.
I thought that that was clear but obviously it was not.
As you quoted: "the whole WWP and its members would be favored...". The
whole WWP and its members = WE. WE are discussing this right now, the
whole WWP and its members.
I find it strange that suddenly I get accused of speaking on behalf of
everyone. The >> WE << was broadly used, several times before in this
same discussion to express not only facts but personal views and
sugestions (that could apply only personally and not as a group).
Please, chill out a bit.
Eduardo
* #removed# wrote, On 26/05/2008 11:09 PM:
>
> ---------------------- Original Message: --------------------- From:
> Eduardo Hutter <#removed#
> <mailto:admForum%40brasmontreal.net>>
>
> > the whole WWP and its members would be favored by associating with
> > this project.
> >
> No, some members of the WWP might be favored, others would not. I
> urge you to stop generalizing how you feel. Don't assume that what
> you like applies to everyone. Speak for yourself. You can't speak for
> others. Speaking for myself, the more I see of the project, the less
> I want to be part of it. For example, the way they showed the demo,
> the screen looked to be in a darkened room, giving a frame to the
> visuals. But in the exhibit at Stuttgart, the screen was in a lighted
> space with other things going on. Especially below the screen,
> distracting action takes place. Kind of like having a table at a
> fair.
>
> -- Caroling, www.wholeo.net