[FRIAM] "certain codes of conduct"

Frank Wimberly wimberly3 at gmail.com
Thu Jul 30 18:43:17 EDT 2020 

p.s.  She and Irene Lee would have been in the same class at Chicago.

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020, 4:42 PM Frank Wimberly <wimberly3 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Wow, your son did very well, Merle I hope your other son will return to
> righteous pursuit.
>
> After my daughter was admitted to Chicago I received a call from their
> admissions office.  The caller said that they were surprised that they
> hadn't heard from her.  I apologized for not having answered yet but said
> that we had decided that she would go to Michigan because we wanted her to
> have a more well-rounded college experience.  She said  incredulously that
> she was amazed that we would consider sending her there when she had been
> admitted to Chicago.  Money wasn't the issue since Carnegie Mellon would
> pay the majority of the tuition in either case.  She was and is very happy
> with her Michigan education.
>
> ---
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>
> 505 670-9918
> Santa Fe, NM
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020, 4:23 PM Merle Lefkoff <merlelefkoff at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> 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
>> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
>> 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/
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20200730/7e9af5e7/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Friam mailing list