[unrev-II] Use Case...Competing Reductions

From: Rod Welch (rowelch@attglobal.net)
Date: Wed Apr 12 2000 - 13:38:56 PDT

  • Next message: malcolmdean@earthlink.net: "[unrev-II] Session 8 - comments"

    Eric,

    A concrete example would make it make it easier to grasp your idea, and the
    improvement contemplated. The record of the DKR meeting on 000324 shows a
    summary, for example, and identifies some responses.

    http://www.welchco.com/sd/08/00101/02/00/03/24/160030.HTM

    Does this use case relate to that situation, or can you point to another example
    in the project record that illustrates this use case....

    http://welchco.com/04/00067/63/00401.HTM

    Thanks.

    Rod

    Eric Armstrong wrote:

    > A node collects a number of responses, arguments
    > and counter arguments in a deep hierarchy.
    >
    > Person 1 writes a "summary" of the arguments
    > for and the arguments against.
    >
    > The new nodes need to replace the original set
    > of nodes, and yet link to them. (Given responses
    > +1, +2, -1, -2, the +summary should replace +1
    > and +2, while the -summary should replace -1
    > and -2.)
    >
    > Meanwhile, Person 2 also writes a summary that aims
    > to replace the arguments. The two summaries are
    > now "siblings", each of get evaluated by others.
    > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >
    > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    > Community email addresses:
    > Post message: unrev-II@onelist.com
    > Subscribe: unrev-II-subscribe@onelist.com
    > Unsubscribe: unrev-II-unsubscribe@onelist.com
    > List owner: unrev-II-owner@onelist.com
    >
    > Shortcut URL to this page:
    > http://www.onelist.com/community/unrev-II



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 12 2000 - 13:45:09 PDT