Message 04199 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT04118 Message: 17/27 L16 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: [ox-en] Kula and other comments from Gregers

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 18:29:07 [PHONE NUMBER REMOVED], Gregers Petersen <gp.ioa> wrote:

This is a discussion which takes place between you and me, it might take
place on a public mailing-list - but I'm talking to you not everyone in
the world.

I disagree, we are having a discussion on a public list exactly because
other people
are welcome to read and contribute. This is n or about me or my specific
knowledge, you are simply
posturing, expecting me to defer to your rank by making the topic how many
books we have read, presumable
to demonstrate you have read more. Forget it, assume I have read none and
make your point.

Not sure what you are asking, a big man is an form of chief or sub chief
as far as I know.

Here you'r some what wrong: A "Big Man" is given authority by people,
while a "Great Man" has authority over people (wields power) - and this
then asks; what is a "chief"?

I already answer this. A chiefdom is a postulated transitional society
between kin-communal and state-based, I'm certain you know this so
if you have some new information to add, please do so and _apply_ it 
to the topic being discussed. 

This is not a who knows more about anthropology contest.

Could you elaborate with an example or two, of such chiefdoms?

No. Why should I when you have not established the relevance of any of

What point are you trying to make?

Gregers you being overly generous assuming I have a read a _complete_ 20
year old
anthropology text book, I have not even read that.

Then you should stay away from making references to things, concepts and
subjects of which you have no knowledge.


If I don't make references to things, how can people help me _refine_ my
I am not embarrassed to be wrong, I would rather say something wrong and
have it 
corrected, then be ignorant in silence.

If you think I am wrong about what I am saying, demonstrate it, don't hide
ranks, prerequisites and qualifications.

Then please help me elaborate it, and I will take whatever you help me
and use it in my own attempts to find and experiment with new ways of
and sharing.

Good - but don't expect that everybody just licks-up your results and

I certainly don't. Which is why I demonstrate my points logical and don't
rely on
credentials and special pleading.

Don't pull this; 'please, please feeel sorry for me' trick - write a new
version of your text instead.

You've lost the plot.

You are claiming I have missed an important question, yet refuse to raise
it, expecting 
me to go on any wild goose chase you like.

I'm not asking you to feel sorry for me, I'm telling you not to assign me
work or ask me
to make your argument for you. If you have something to say, say it,
don't waste our time with games.

Dmytri Kleiner
editing text files since 1981

Contact: projekt

Thread: oxenT04118 Message: 17/27 L16 [In index]
Message 04199 [Homepage] [Navigation]