17 Dec
2015
17 Dec
'15
1:53 p.m.
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015, Neal Schlein wrote:
On Dec 17, 2015 8:50 AM, "Aahz Maruch via
Callers" <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Maybe, but I was responding specifically to the whole phrase "complete
standardisation". I can rant on and on about the falsity of "dancing by
definition". ;-) Obviously square dancing is more standardized than
contra.
--
Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 http://rule6.info/
<*> <*> <*>
"In 1968 it took the computing power of 2 C-64's to fly a rocket to the moon.
Now, in 1998 it takes the Power of a Pentium 200 to run Microsoft Windows 98.
Something must have gone wrong." --/bin/fortune
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015, John Sweeney via Callers
wrote:
Umm...Aahz, I think you missed the point about standardization in contra
versus MWSD.
Whether complete standardisation is a good thing or a bad thing is another
matter entirely; we all have our own opinions about MWSD :-)
Note that MWSD is not completely standardized -- it's more like the C
programming language with areas that are ill-defined, or at least which
only extremely nitpicky people know how to do correctly.