[FRIAM] "certain codes of conduct"

[Merle Lefkoff]

Frank, I never gave a gift to M.I.T. either, and my youngest son was not
accepted.   He went on to graduate from UCSD with a 4.0 average and sold
the GIS company he co-founded to Kodak when he was 23 years old.  I have
always assumed he was turned down because he went to a public high school
in the South and came from a middle class background.

My oldest son got into grad school at the U. of Chicago because a friend of
mine who was a Chicago alum and well-known politician wrote a letter.
Milton ("There's no such thing as a free lunch") Friedman adopted my son as
a protage and turned him away from righteous pursuit.  I've never forgiven
that wicked business school.

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 3:05 PM Merle Lefkoff <merlelefkoff at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Of course not, Frank, but evidently, many do.
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 2:46 PM Frank Wimberly <wimberly3 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> My daughter was admitted to the University of Chicago and the University
>> of Michigan and I never gave either university a gift.
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> ---
>> Frank C. Wimberly
>> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
>> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>>
>> 505 670-9918
>> Santa Fe, NM
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020, 3:13 PM Merle Lefkoff <merlelefkoff at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Nick,
>>>
>>> I'm a Piketty fan, and he takes on this subject in "Capital" in a
>>> variety of different ways.  For instance, Harvard, Princeton and Yale are
>>> so well endowed by alumni that they get a 6.2% return and they become what
>>> Piketty calls "rentiers", people and institutions able to support
>>> themselves through their capital income. The rentiers gifts get their kids
>>> in. And this is just one example of the absence of equal opportunity in our
>>> most prestigious universities. If we "allowed broader segments of the
>>> population to have access to (these institutions), this would surely be the
>>> most effective way of increasing wages at the low to medium end of the
>>> scale and decreasing the upper decile's share of both wages and total
>>> income."
>>>
>>> I was excited to find, also,  Piketty's pairing of climate change and
>>> "improving educational access" as two of the most challenging issues facing
>>> humanity.  The knowledge that will be needed in the next future is hard to
>>> imagine, but if we are to keep the peace as the systems continue to
>>> collapse, we need to get everyone ready to cope.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Later in the book Piketty pairs climate change with the idea of
>>> improving educational access as two of the greatest “challenges” to the
>>> human race.  Ameliorating schooling is even more important than fixing
>>> governmental debt: “the more urgent need is to increase our educational
>>> capital” (568)
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 1:23 PM <thompnickson2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Eric,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A Marxist would say, I think, although I have barely ever known one,
>>>> that every act of training is simultaneously an act of indoctrination and
>>>> class reproduction.  If the declaration of independence is correct, what an
>>>> extraordinary coincidence it is that the children of wealthy well educated
>>>> people tend to be wealthy and well educated!   Well, some would say that
>>>> that’s because ABILITY is inherited.  But that precisely is racism, isn’t
>>>> it?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So if, as our colleagues are starting to assert, technical proficiency
>>>> is an evanescent benefit, what precisely remains of a “good” education but
>>>> indoctrination in class values and the  inheritance of class benefits?
>>>> This is NOT for me a rhetorical question, because I gave up on the
>>>> technical proficiency justification (except perhaps for writing) before I
>>>> even became a  professor.  So what WAS it I was conveying to my students
>>>> all those years, if not the indoctrination of class values and the
>>>> inheritance of class benefits?  Inquiring Readers Want to Know!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nick
>>>>
>>>> Nicholas Thompson
>>>>
>>>> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
>>>>
>>>> Clark University
>>>>
>>>> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com
>>>>
>>>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Eric Charles
>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, July 30, 2020 1:02 PM
>>>> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
>>>> friam at redfish.com>
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] "certain codes of conduct"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Come on Nick... outside new disciplines emerging, those who will change
>>>> a discipline over the next 20 years are typically well embedded within the
>>>> discipline now. That's kind of how cumulative knowledge construction works.
>>>> But... to emphasize it a bit more bluntly.... The primary purpose of
>>>> college isn't to reproduce the professoriate, or produce the next
>>>> generation of innovators within the professorate: It is to provide a
>>>> general set of skills (sometimes called the "hidden curriculum"), which
>>>> provides a baseline of things a person with a college degree can reasonably
>>>> be expected to be able to do. College is justified by the assertion that
>>>> you can't really get those skills outside of trying to do something
>>>> intellectual with some seriousness; what you are trying to be
>>>> intellectually serious about doesn't matter nearly so much, though
>>>> obviously some skills will be emphasized more in some areas.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Most jobs most people want require "a college degree". They don't
>>>> require a college degree in anything in particular. That makes sense, IF
>>>> college degrees are reasonably well correlated with having some set of
>>>> skills most general employers value in most of their employees. It
>>>> generally helps to have employees who can read, write, and math at a
>>>> certain level, who can present things in standard forms orally,
>>>> graphically, and in writing. It generally helps to have employees who can
>>>> integrate ideas and come up with solutions, who can balance various
>>>> priorities, who can adapt to arbitrary requirements that a boss or company
>>>> might impose. It generally helps to have employees who can work
>>>> productively on team projects, as leaders or followers. Etc., etc. The less
>>>> college degrees reliably indicate those skills, the less valuable they are
>>>> (on average).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There is a quirky college that revamped it's curriculum a few decades
>>>> ago to focus on "8 Abilities": Communication, Problem Solving, Social
>>>> Interaction, Effective Citizenship, Analysis, Valuing, Aesthetic
>>>> Engagement, and Developing a Global Perspective. It looks like they've gone
>>>> back a bit towards traditional majors, but still all classes, in all
>>>> majors, have to explicitly focus on developing at least one of those
>>>> abilities in the students. (https://www.alverno.edu/Undergraduate)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Most colleges are not doing anything so dramatic, but many are still
>>>> making great strides in helping students figure out skills that
>>>> others arrive with, so they can at least start from a more even place. See
>>>> examples here:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/08/04/book-argues-mentoring-programs-should-try-unveil-colleges-hidden-curriculum
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://thehub.georgetown.domains/realhub/experience/mastering-the-hidden-curriculum-1-2/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://college.lclark.edu/live/events/297173-the-hidden-curriculum
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 5:54 PM <thompnickson2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi, Eric,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for laying this out.  I think some of it’s wrong, but it’s clear
>>>> and provocative.  I apologize to non-academics on the list for my focus on
>>>> academia.  I suppose one might argue that the best thing that might happen
>>>> to Massachusetts is the dismemberment of Harvard and the distribution of
>>>> its buildings for housing and it’s endowment for income equalization.  But
>>>> I don’t think so.  Not yet, any way.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To the extent that psychology and White Psychology and Rich psychology
>>>> and poor psychology are all the same, and if they all should be or will be
>>>> the same 20 years from now as they are now, your analysis makes sense.
>>>> But, while I would like to think that psychology is like physics in that
>>>> regard, I think I have to admit that it isn’t.  So, teaching everybody who
>>>> comes to, say, the Harvard Psychology Department, the skills of
>>>>  contemporary (mostly white) psychologists, precludes the learning not only
>>>> of what non-privileged psychologists know, given the drift of things
>>>> demographically and ideologically, it precludes the learning of what
>>>> Psychology will be in 20 years.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don’t know what the solution is.  Every once in a while a student in
>>>> my evolution classes would remonstrate with me for not giving equal time to
>>>> biblical creation theories.  I would say, in response, “Because everything
>>>> I know tells me that they are wrong.  Furthermore, I cannot teach what I do
>>>> not know, and I don’t know those theories.  I am not the person to be your
>>>> teacher if that is what you want to learn.”  Now of course, that’s a pretty
>>>> lame response, but it has the marginal benefit of being honest.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But what if we knew, for sure, that the country was going to be run by
>>>> Baptists in 20 years.  Under those conditions, wouldn’t my best response
>>>> be, “I can’t; you’re right; I resign.”
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am sure the metaphor is creepy in some way, but it’s the best I can
>>>> come up with.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nick
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nicholas Thompson
>>>>
>>>> Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology
>>>>
>>>> Clark University
>>>>
>>>> ThompNickSon2 at gmail.com
>>>>
>>>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Merle Lefkoff
>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 29, 2020 3:02 PM
>>>> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
>>>> friam at redfish.com>
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] "certain codes of conduct"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Eric, thank you for your reply.  Forgive me for suggesting a larger
>>>> systemic problem, connected for me to the problems in our democratic
>>>> system, our global economic system, and our international governance
>>>> system--and also ultimately related to the existential threat of the
>>>> collapse of the living systems that nurture our species.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The democracy and Constitution our founders gave us at the end of the
>>>> 18th century has structural flaws we have tried to overcome.  The global
>>>> economic system that the victors of WWII gave us at Bretton Woods in 1944
>>>> has similar structural flaws that we have also tried (not very hard) to
>>>> overcome.  The United Nations that emerged a year later in 1945 to convene
>>>> a new international order shares similar structural problems.  There is a
>>>> pattern here. At its core is domination and exclusivity.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The present hesitant shifts in the old narratives--and relationships--
>>>> that created our major social, economic and political systems are the
>>>> result of gladiators and dragon-slayers finally targeting the positive
>>>> feedback loops that keep reinforcing historic institutional design errors.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'll stop here, because I'm even boring myself.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 9:49 PM Eric Charles <
>>>> eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Nick, the "ire" is perfectly fine. I didn't need to couch my statement
>>>> in that way, and doing so obviously opened me to Merle's response.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Merle,
>>>>
>>>> I think the social criticism is generally valid, but as a critique of
>>>> college in particular it is feeds a general confusion about what college
>>>> should be about, which ultimately speeds the fall of the system it seeks to
>>>> reform.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> One of the obvious legitimate functions of college is indoctrination
>>>> into a profession. If you don't want to be indoctrinated into a profession
>>>> that college indoctrinates people into, then college probably isn't for
>>>> you.  If you get out of college not-indoctrinated-into-a-profession,
>>>> something has gone wrong. For example, if you want to get a degree in
>>>> psychology, you need to learn to write in some reasonable semblance of APA
>>>> style. That includes its own horribly arbitrary set of grammar rules,
>>>> formatting and the like. It is screwed up, in some sense, but it isn't
>>>> imperialist oppression aimed at minorities. Arbitrary norms are found in
>>>> all professions, and conforming to them is part of being "professional".
>>>> Also, if you got a degree in psychology, without anyone forcing you to
>>>> learn how to approach problems, write reports, criticize articles, etc., in
>>>> the manner that professional psychologists tend to do those things,
>>>> something has gone wrong. If you want to think about psychology-related
>>>> stuff in the way you already think about those things, then don't go to
>>>> college. If you want to learn to think about them in the way the
>>>> professional community does, then college might make senes. (Note, I'm *not
>>>> *saying you have to *agree *with how the professional community does
>>>> things, just that you should be able to replicate, with some reasonable
>>>> accuracy, the standard professional approach.) Where you start from doesn't
>>>> really matter; though the curricula *should *be more adaptive to the
>>>> starting place of the various students, by the end you should be
>>>> professional indoctrinated, that's the whole point.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In addition, college functions to indoctrinate people into a certain
>>>> part of society... or at least it used to. Because, traditionally, most
>>>> college graduates don't get work in exactly the thing they studied, this
>>>> "hidden curriculum" has often been more important than the obvious
>>>> curriculum. College graduates should be able to read, write, and math at a
>>>> certain level, generally think through problems at a certain level, be able
>>>> to present ideas to an audience in spoken or written form, be able to adapt
>>>> to arbitrary assignments with a certain level of comfort, be a team leader,
>>>> be a pro-active follower, etc.  Here again, colleges *should *be more
>>>> adaptive to the starting place of the various students, but that doesn't
>>>> mean their end point should be abandoned. Here you see big differences
>>>> between colleges, based on what they are preparing you for. A college like
>>>> Swathmore or Bucknell is preparing you to be able to do those things for
>>>> different audiences than Oberlin or Penn State. If you are at a school that
>>>> is well designed to prepare you for something you don't want to be prepared
>>>> for... that's not imperialist oppression, that's your having made an
>>>> unfortunate choice of  where to go.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Frankly, most colleges currently suck at those two goals, and most
>>>> other functions you might want them to have.  It is easy to find studies
>>>> showing that lots of people graduate college without high school level
>>>> reading, writing, and math abilities. It is also easy to find students who
>>>> graduate with almost no indoctrination into the field of study they were
>>>> purportedly pursuing.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Under those conditions, it is not surprising that people view a college
>>>> degree as largely symbolic marker, required for entry into the job market
>>>> or some such nonsense. However, the solution shouldn't be to make college
>>>> degrees even less indicative of having attained particular skills. The less
>>>> a college degree indicates having a certain variety of skills, the less
>>>> value is provided to employers to select based on the presence of a degree,
>>>> and the less value it gives a college graduate to have a degree. Returning
>>>> to the indoctrination thing, we can see the (potential) flaw in the
>>>> criticism of the curriculum. It doesn't make a lot of sense to say, "I
>>>> really want a degree from Rutgers, because employers value degrees from
>>>> Rutgers, but I also think Rutgers should change its curriculum to not be so
>>>> strict in only letting people graduate if they actually have the skills
>>>> employers value." The value of the degree, particularly to a person trying
>>>> to get out of a bad situation, is entirely based on its reliably indicating
>>>> some set of skills, and the ability to write in a semi-formal manner is one
>>>> of those skills (to return to the more narrow original context).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you formed a solid college curriculum around mastering skills other
>>>> than those traditionally trained in college, that would be fine (and I
>>>> think that is what Nick is struggling to get at). And if those skills were
>>>> valued (economically, or merely for personal growth) then a degree from
>>>> that college would be a reliable indicator of that specific valuable
>>>> achievement. But that is very different than allowing students to get
>>>> through college with whatever skills they arrived with, just because you
>>>> are afraid that enforcing *any *strict requirements might make you an
>>>> imperialist monster. The former creates a marketplace for students to
>>>> choose from, while the latter just guarantees that college degrees continue
>>>> to become less and less valuable, particularly to the people who most seek
>>>> to benefit by getting them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (Sorry, that ended up longer than intended.... but it's late... I don't
>>>> think I can get it tighter right now... and your question deserves a
>>>> reply.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 11:21 PM Merle Lefkoff <merlelefkoff at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> And why, O Eric of a deep understanding, are you not a fan?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 8:17 PM Merle Lefkoff <merlelefkoff at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Clearly the implicit bias is that all of these reading requirements
>>>> were written by White men.  In an attempt to redress this problem I have
>>>> noticed lately that the NY Times book review seems to be bending over
>>>> backwards to review books written by women of color.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 7:03 PM Frank Wimberly <wimberly3 at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I'm trying to remember my freshman English class.  Every other Friday
>>>> we had to submit a five hundred word essay on the class readings. On
>>>> alternate Fridays we had to write an in-class paragraph or two on those
>>>> readings.  The readings included the following:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Catcher in the Rye by Salinger
>>>>
>>>> Victory by Conrad
>>>>
>>>> The Republic by Plato
>>>>
>>>> All the King's Men by Warren
>>>>
>>>> Brave New World by Huxley
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Numerous essays on personal integrity by various authors.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't see that any of those had to do with unconscious racism or
>>>> implicit bias unless the personal integrity essays did.  I think I had to
>>>> read The Invisible Man by Ellison but that may have been in a later year in
>>>> a political science or US history class at Berkeley.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> All this was 54 years ago.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Frank
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> Frank C. Wimberly
>>>> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
>>>> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>>>>
>>>> 505 670-9918
>>>> Santa Fe, NM
>>>>
>>>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>>>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>>>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
>>>> Center for Emergent Diplomacy
>>>> emergentdiplomacy.org
>>>>
>>>> Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> mobile:  (303) 859-5609
>>>> skype:  merle.lelfkoff2
>>>>
>>>> twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
>>>> Center for Emergent Diplomacy
>>>> emergentdiplomacy.org
>>>>
>>>> Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> mobile:  (303) 859-5609
>>>> skype:  merle.lelfkoff2
>>>>
>>>> twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff
>>>>
>>>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>>>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>>>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>>>>
>>>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>>>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>>>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
>>>> Center for Emergent Diplomacy
>>>> emergentdiplomacy.org
>>>>
>>>> Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> mobile:  (303) 859-5609
>>>> skype:  merle.lelfkoff2
>>>>
>>>> twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff
>>>>
>>>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>>>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>>>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>>>>
>>>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>>>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>>>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
>>> Center for Emergent Diplomacy
>>> emergentdiplomacy.org
>>> Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
>>>
>>> mobile:  (303) 859-5609
>>> skype:  merle.lelfkoff2
>>> twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff
>>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>>>
>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>>
>
>
> --
> Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
> Center for Emergent Diplomacy
> emergentdiplomacy.org
> Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA
>
> mobile:  (303) 859-5609
> skype:  merle.lelfkoff2
> twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff
>


-- 
Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D.
Center for Emergent Diplomacy
emergentdiplomacy.org
Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA

mobile:  (303) 859-5609
skype:  merle.lelfkoff2
twitter: @Merle_Lefkoff
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20200730/64d22855/attachment.html>