[FRIAM] Back at the ranch, I'm enjoying the popcorn.
Pieter Steenekamp
pieters at randcontrols.co.za
Wed Mar 5 21:32:23 EST 2025
Ah, now I see how it works!
If Trump's actions accidentally lead to a good outcome—well, that’s just an
unintended consequence.
If things go south, though—obviously, it’s all Trump’s fault.
Conclusion? Trump is bad, no matter what.
How about we skip the pre-packaged outrage and just focus on what he’s
actually doing to end the war in Ukraine? Crazy idea, I know.
On Wed, 5 Mar 2025 at 18:16, Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com> wrote:
> What did Zelensky get for it? Trump cuts off U.S. ISR. One of the things
> that Europe cannot replace.
>
>
>
> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Pieter Steenekamp
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 5, 2025 5:28 AM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Back at the ranch, I'm enjoying the popcorn.
>
>
>
> Another round of popcorn, please—the plot thickens.
>
> After Friday’s tantrum in the White House, Zelensky has decided to toe the
> line.
>
> Start quoting Zelensky (
> https://x.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1896948147085049916)
>
> I would like to reiterate Ukraine’s commitment to peace.
>
> None of us wants an endless war. Ukraine is ready to come to the
> negotiating table as soon as possible to bring lasting peace closer. Nobody
> wants peace more than Ukrainians. My team and I stand ready to work under
> President Trump’s strong leadership to get a peace that lasts.
>
> We are ready to work fast to end the war, and the first stages could be
> the release of prisoners and a truce in the sky—a ban on missiles,
> long-range drones, and bombs on energy and other civilian infrastructure—as
> well as an immediate truce at sea, if Russia does the same. Then we want to
> move very fast through all the next stages and work with the US to agree on
> a strong final deal.
>
> We truly value how much America has done to help Ukraine maintain its
> sovereignty and independence. And we remember the moment when things
> changed—when President Trump provided Ukraine with Javelins. We are
> grateful for this.
>
> Our meeting in Washington, at the White House on Friday, did not go the
> way it was supposed to. It is regrettable that it happened this way. It is
> time to make things right. We would like future cooperation and
> communication to be constructive.
>
> Regarding the agreement on minerals and security, Ukraine is ready to sign
> it anytime and in any convenient format. We see this agreement as a step
> toward greater security and solid security guarantees, and I truly hope it
> will work effectively.
>
> End quote
>
> I’m particularly pleased about this because I believe Trump’s peace deal
> could lead to a very good outcome. Here’s why:
>
> - The war continues to exact a heavy toll on both Ukraine and Russia, in
> both human lives and economic impact.
> - The risk of escalation into a catastrophic scenario—such as nuclear
> conflict or even World War III—is significantly reduced.
> - In many ways, Russia has already lost. Their goal was to capture Kyiv
> and control all of Ukraine, but that is now completely unrealistic. Their
> economy is in ruins, they’ve lost thousands of soldiers, and Putin has
> broken the social contract with Russian citizens. Another invasion? All but
> impossible.
> - Putin’s global standing is in shambles. Before the invasion, he and Xi
> were the two key leaders of BRICS. Now, Xi stands alone—one less adversary
> to worry about.
>
> Take a minute to think about it. Until now, Zelensky seemed determined to
> continue the war with no clear end in sight. How long did he think it could
> go on? At what cost? Now, he’s backing Trump’s peace initiative. Maybe it
> will fail, and the war will continue—but surely, it’s worth a shot. Right?
>
>
>
> On Wed, 5 Mar 2025 at 04:16, Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com> wrote:
>
> You’ve got one job Deep State. One Job.
>
>
>
> *From: *Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of steve smith <
> sasmyth at swcp.com>
> *Date: *Tuesday, March 4, 2025 at 5:03 PM
> *To: *friam at redfish.com <friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [FRIAM] Back at the ranch, I'm enjoying the popcorn.
>
>
>
> On 3/4/25 10:15 AM, Tom Johnson wrote:
>
> You're assuming the ongoing presence of Trump and Putin.
>
> I don't know about Putin, but Trump is a cult leader. If something happens
> to him, Vance etc al. can't carry the water.
>
> I agree, nobody able to carry Trump's nor Putin's water (as it were)... a
> bit of a red=herring at that point... some wild card might appear out of
> nowhere and (mis)fill the void in some unexpected way (e.g. Asimov's "Mule"
> of "theFoundation"?)
>
> One tiny anueurism or a dose of pollonium in the diet coke or some Ioicane
> Powder and the modern world diffracts off into some strange new basin of
> attraction we haven't even imagined?
>
> *Viva la punctuated equllibrium!*
>
>
>
> T
>
>
>
>
>
> =======================
> Tom Johnson
> Inst. for Analytic Journalism
> Santa Fe, New Mexico
> 505-577-6482
> =======================
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 3, 2025, 9:44 PM steve smith <sasmyth at swcp.com> wrote:
>
> Friday afternoon the simple term "WWIII" took on a whole new
> understanding/context for me.
>
> Before that it was some variation on a nuclear exchange between any 2-3 of
> the major nuclear powers (US/USSR/China) which was held at bay mostly by
> variations on MAD. Not only did the possibility of retaliation (before
> first-strike lands, or soon after) make it unthinkable, but so did the
> challenges of regional and global nuclear contamination and a likely
> nuclear winter (minimum of northern hemisphere, but global consequences).
>
> Now I see it being something more like a new European War similar to WWI &
> WWII, not involving North America directly (we don't pitch nor catch any)
>
> 1. Europe sends in air and ground troops (and more equipment) to
> Ukraine to squash Putin's vestigal army. Marcus' no-fly-zone.
>
>
> 1. Ukraine continues to punish Russia (e.g. destroying military assets
> inside Russia)
> 2. The European coalition masses conventional forces on Russian
> borders with a "ready posture"
> 3. Russia is humiliated.
> 4. Putin (not Russia) in his humiliation decides to use his
> nukes... craters half the major cities or capitols in UK/EU.
> 5. France and UK have a *handful* of nukes. I'm out of date, most
> or all are on nuclear subs which Russia may or may not know the location of.
> 6. Moscow and a few 'grads become craters.
> 7. Nuclear Winter
> 8. Misery across Eurasia, the likes of which Russians are more
> accustomed
>
>
> 2. Europe can't agree enough to give Ukraine decisive support (as in 1
> above).
>
>
> 1. Russia grinds Ukraine down, while using up yet more of it's own
> dwindling military and human capital.
> 2. Europe and Russia rattle sabers for months or years but Russia
> is too depleted to continue a conventional war.
> 3. Russia (Putin) gets impatient or arrogant and decides to nuke
> European powers.
> 4. Again, the handful of non-US nukes targeted on Russia are enough
> to make a bad mess and maybe even win but only if used pre-emptively.
> 5. (Western) Eurasia is a mess for a century.
>
>
> 3. In either case MAGA (with/without Trump alive/vital/engaged) sits
> back and eats popcorn.
>
>
> 1. If MAGA holds US power, they grind away at European and possibly
> Russian resources, stealing and war profiteering boldly.
> 2. Maybe anti-MAGA backlashes MAGA out of power (probably has to be
> a strong political win followed by some minor but decisive bloodshed).
> Maybe we help them rebuild (similar to post-WWII) or maybe we just sit back
> on our side of the Ocean.
>
>
> 4. China waits patiently for the right moment to grab Mongolia for
> it's "raw earth" (trump SIC) and/or Taiwan.... possibly are both worth
> their effort... possibly the US uses the European distraction as an
> opportunity to treat China as our only overt competitor.
>
> I don't see the world "a better place" for any of this except in the
> extreme case of significant depopulation of both (sadly) third-world
> innocents and first-world belligerents (military, political, economic), and
> even then it isn't clear to me just *when* or *how* the "meek inherit the
> earth" but I'll be damned if it isn't an outcome I find myself rooting
> for! Feels like if COVID had just been slightly more virulent, we might
> have gotten there by a vaguely more graceful route?
>
> GAH!
>
>
>
> On 3/3/25 9:10 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>
>
> 1. NATO creates a no-fly zone over Ukraine, and destroys any Russian
> asset in Ukraine
> 2. The Ukranians continue to develop their drone programs for targeted
> attacks in Russia
> 3. Europe gives them long-range weapons, Storm Shadow and Taurus for
> larger targets
>
>
>
> Biden should have just done this, knowing that Trump would throw the world
> into chaos.
>
>
>
> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> <friam-bounces at redfish.com> *On
> Behalf Of *Pieter Steenekamp
> *Sent:* Monday, March 3, 2025 7:50 PM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> <friam at redfish.com> <friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Back at the ranch, I'm enjoying the popcorn.
>
>
>
>
> A Case For and Against Trump in the Context of Ukraine
>
> The Case Against Trump
> Russia invaded Ukraine, and Ukraine has been fighting back heroically for
> three years. It is crucial to take decisive action against countries that
> invade others unprovoked. A good example is the First Gulf War, when Iraq
> invaded Kuwait, and the U.S. led a coalition to push Iraq out. That kind of
> response helps maintain international order.
>
> However, Trump now portrays Ukraine as the aggressor and openly aligns
> himself with Putin. His stance undermines the principle of standing against
> aggression and emboldens authoritarian regimes. His willingness to cozy up
> to Putin is simply wrong. Period.
>
> The Case For Trump
> Maintaining international order is important, but only if you have the
> power to enforce it effectively. If you can't win a war, engaging in it is
> a mistake. Consider how the U.S. aligned with Stalin in the later stages of
> World War II—not because Stalin was good, but because confronting him
> directly wasn’t a realistic option at the time. Putin may be an amateur
> compared to Stalin, but the logic remains: if you can’t stop him, you may
> have to find a way to work with him.
>
> Looking at today's reality, there is no viable path to pushing Russia out
> of Ukraine unless the U.S. commits fully—boots on the ground. But no one in
> America supports that. Given this, there’s a case for engaging with Russia
> pragmatically, much like how the U.S. dealt with Stalin, to bring the war
> to an end.
>
> Continuing to support Ukraine half-heartedly, without full military
> commitment, has serious downsides. The war could drag on indefinitely, and
> if Ukraine eventually wins, Russia would be humiliated. A humiliated
> nuclear-armed Russia is a dangerous prospect. History offers a
> warning—Germany’s humiliation after World War I directly contributed to the
> rise of Hitler. The consequences of a humiliated Russia could be similarly
> unpredictable and catastrophic.
>
> My Take
> In my lifetime, we had an almost perfect leader in South Africa—Nelson
> Mandela. Unfortunately, he is no longer with us. But surely, with today's
> AI, we could create a virtual Madiba, and he would know exactly what to do.
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2025 at 22:28, Tom Johnson <jtjohnson555 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> So as usual: Follow the Money.
> If Trump gets a deal with Ukraine on those rare earth minerals, upon
> leaving Ukraine, where does that ore go and to whom? My bet is to some
> company(ies) that Trump et al. have interests in.
>
> TJ
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 3, 2025 at 12:33 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu> wrote:
>
> It’s such an encapsulation of that part of the society (including t and v)
> to think that they could “humiliate” Zelenskyy. By insisting, in a
> conversation with toxic scum, on the relevance of reality, he was about the
> only clean thing in the room that could be heard.
>
> There are people like Fareed Zakaria who think that trump can be somehow
> managed by a canny player. That doesn’t ring correct to me, unless the
> player has a lot of power and money, and it is the power and money that are
> managing trump. No agreement with trump is worth the paper it is written
> on. We all understand that he will do anything he is not stopped from
> doing. The problem with the american presidency is that there become fewer
> and fewer actors who can stop its occupant from doing things, in the era of
> political parties as universalizing corrupting bodies. If this whole train
> continues, they will eventually degrade the u.s. in wealth and power enough
> that its ability to do damage declines. But there is so much accumulated
> right now, that they can do enormous harm before they undercut themselves.
>
> I am persuaded by those who opine that trump has no intention of doing
> anything to aid Ukraine, and that the point of the performance was to put
> up a front for not doing anything, for the same audience who interprets any
> of that as a humiliation of Zelenskyy. If trump could extort money or
> resource access, and then backstab in return for it, I expect he would be
> interested in that opportunity. But not more than that.
>
> I also think that people are living a little bit in the past when they
> comment that, with trump, it’s always about money. That was before the
> first presidency, when his possibilities to exercise abusive power over
> other people in a country with some degree of rule of law was limited,
> relative to the amount of spending he could do (whether solvent or
> insolvent). But the access to abusive power in the presidency, for a
> sociopath, is on a scale not available to anybody else. If money was
> heroin for that addiction, the power of the presidency is fentanyl, and I
> don’t think trump is going back now. Money: fine; but that’s now the
> second motive.
>
> (I think there are elements of this for Musk as well, but there is enough
> about him that is different that I wouldn’t put him in the same category,
> or in the same post here.)
>
> I, of course, don’t _know_ anything, and I don’t even have any
> sophistication thinking in this sphere. But from my long distance from it,
> I can imagine that the calculus is roughly this at the moment: It is still
> possible that trump won’t direct the u.s. military to attack Ukraine
> directly. The question whether it is possible comes back, entirely, to
> what force is available to stop him from ordering it. I don’t doubt for a
> minute that, if the EU starts to get scared, and if they have time to act
> constructively, enough to start to give Ukraine meaningful ability to hold
> land or push back a bit, the u.s. under trump would act as a saboteur of
> that effort.
>
> If that is the correct vantage point, I would imagine that Zelenskyy’s
> challenge is to try to orient the rest of the world into some structure
> that will hem trump and the trumpers in as much as possible from direct
> attack, and where possible against sabotage. (Sabotage is harder, because
> to even find out that it is going on, you need somebody on the inside to
> report.) If they can get some weapons out of the weapons contractors and
> the congressmen, sure; try to do what you can. But any of that has meaning
> only when it is in your hands and being used. Don’t put weight on anything
> short of that.
>
> (I don’t mean, in this, btw, to downplay the true problem that the current
> condition is a WWI-type trench warfare with drones, and the prospect of
> extending that to a point of collapse is already so bad, that it takes
> something truly awful for that not to be the worst. I don’t see indication
> that any good-faith actor anywhere is denying that, though I don’t think
> saying it, alone, makes one a good-faith actor.)
>
>
> I had a conversation with a friend over the weekend who is a NASA program
> manager, and who interpreted a recent directive they had received, to
> discontinue the use of paper straws, and replace them with plastic straws,
> as a kickback to some petroleum company that had bribed trump. Given that
> this is a smart person I am talking to, the quaintness of that
> interpretation took my breath away. It seems clear beyond daylight, to me,
> that the images of turtles with straws in their noses, and seabirds dead of
> them, were the breakthrough that the environmental groups finally got with
> the public, to get some action to ban that specific plastic item as one of
> the most insidiously dangerous and cruel. The point of the paper-straw ban
> was the point of everything with these people. Most directly, it was an
> intent to deliver a “defeat” to the environmental groups, focusing on the
> image that had succeeded for them precisely because it is so awful to have
> to see more of. But more generally, this is the core of meanness. It is a
> rage, by those who are defiled in their nature, against the existence of
> anything that isn’t defiled.
>
> This is again Hannah Arendt’s summary of the last-century European
> political actors: that they didn’t understand the distinction between the
> parties and the movements. The parties wanted to control the government,
> whereas the movements wanted to destroy the government. Public commentary
> on this drives me nuts, because it seems to exactly repeat this error.
> People talk about the appointments of degraded morons to agency heads as
> being about loyalty: take somebody who couldn’t earn anything in a world of
> merit, and put him on a plush perch that he knows he will only retain as
> long as he can continue to curry favor. But I believe that only to about a
> 30% level as the motive. And it is an inward-facing motive; how to keep
> various functionaries on a leash. There is an outward-directed motive, and
> I think that is about 70% of the drive. These people are put there,
> because he couldn’t find anybody worse. It is again the effort to eliminate
> the notion of legitimacy from the concept of society people will adopt and
> live within.
>
> The word I wanted to use for the latter, thinking over the weekend, was
> “vesting”. It’s a bit of a bland word, but it wraps up several things that
> otherwise I can’t encompass in one word. The cognitive concept of truth;
> abstract notions such as justice; the society as an agreement underpinned
> by legitimized institutions. What all these have in common is that people
> accept restraint to uphold a prior commitment to these other things as
> “higher” over the long run. And when the mob wants to destroy the state —
> meaning, really to destroy that concept of society — it is this “higher”
> that they can keep their attention fixed on, as all the other particular
> targets (immigrants, academics, civil servants, black people, gay people,
> etc.) get rotated in and out as opportunities arise.
>
> So anyway: if every dealing with trump turns out to be, over time, a loss
> for Zelenskyy — the reality behind the literary Faustian Bargain — he may
> not be worse off having the break occur earlier. I don’t know what it may
> buy him to have humiliated t and v, by having the dignity to not accept
> those terms of conversation, in terms of coalition-building with other
> heads of state.
>
>
> I do continue to wonder what China’s play in this will be. I imagine they
> think they will have no trouble “managing” Russia into some kind of
> continuing subordinate status, when it is alone with a gigantic land area
> but a limited economy and population. If it were even just Russia
> swallowing Ukraine, China might still think of that as an okay outcome. I
> feel pretty sure they want the rare earths, in view of their relations with
> Mongolia up to now, and the fact that the only thing protecting Taiwan is
> that it holds the entire world’s highest technology as a trust, and
> collapsing it would cause such a large global implosion that it would
> destabilize China as well, for now. But they probably figure they can get
> those from Russian control, where Russia couldn’t develop them internally
> anyway. An actual coalition of Russia with the U.S., however, could become
> more worrisome for China, even if the U.S. is undergoing a process of
> self-degradation. So it is not inconceivable to me that China could want
> some stalemate to go on a while longer, which limits the coordination of
> the trumpers with other large actors as much as feasible. Another Faustian
> bargain for Zelenskyy if it is offered. But maybe more predictable in the
> short term.
>
> But there, too, I don’t know anything.
>
> Eric
>
>
>
> > On Mar 3, 2025, at 11:34, steve smith <sasmyth at swcp.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> It's way too generous to say "Trump has a case". Trump and Vance's
> "case" consists of "You should be grateful to us because we give you
> money". I.e. suck up to me and I'll deign to give you more money.
> > I don't think Trump or Vance have backed any significant support for
> Ukraine. The US people through our elected representatives and tax
> dollars *HAVE* supported Ukraine (albeit a little slowly an a little
> anemically and a little timidly sometimes?). Zelensky has been
> extravagantly and eloquently thankful to all of the above. Trump and Vance
> were spoiling for an opportunity to try to humiliate Zelensky in front of
> the cameras, so they contrived it.
> >> Maybe someone makes the case you say is Trump's. But it's not Trump
> making that case. If he sporadically vomits words that sound like that,
> it's because they were put into his mouth by someone else. The question is
> Who put them there? Putin? Elno? Thiel?
> >
> > The "raw earth" (sic Trump) deal was extortion. Whether Ukraine's
> mineral resources could or should be mortgaged to secure the financial
> support is one thing, but the idea that the point of the West supporting
> Ukraine against the hyper-aggressive Putin-led Russia is about economics
> completely misses the point. Zelensky is right to avoid "doing business
> with" anyone who is not a clear staunch ally when in this situation.
> >
> > Trump & Allies are clearly "War Profiteers", a fine old tradition among
> the industrialists and financiers of the "free world".
> >
> >
> >>
> >> On 3/2/25 7:42 PM, Pieter Steenekamp wrote:
> >>> Just watched a new episode where two toddlers threw their toys out of
> the cot.
> >>>
> >>> Zelensky makes a strong case — Putin is unreliable, having broken
> numerous agreements in the past, so any peace deal would need ironclad
> security guarantees. But lecturing Trump is hardly the way to secure a
> favorable minerals trade agreement.
> >>>
> >>> Trump also has a valid case — the war is stagnating, there’s no
> realistic military path to driving Russia out of Ukraine, and pursuing
> peace makes sense. But losing your temper at an international press
> conference is not the way to get there.
> >>>
> >>> At the end of the day, they’re all human, and it makes for great
> real-life drama. I can't wait for the next episode!
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> > <OpenPGP_0xD5BAF94F88AFFA63.asc>.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ...
> / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-.
> ..- .-..
> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,jwBcVvWV2qFLmVY1BdPfbz9PHIyvhQ6WdSquGywiuT73UA4-FdxZ7Sbanwepc4RplYGZFiTzOj_S9EI5fIKTnyoCd2GaAay6kKV3PUMCTufcYYotcj_Z&typo=1
> > to (un)subscribe
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,2Nvp1o0BuonumzjRaAgB261x0CCbqCVu7O1v9MDVMFkEhnsyKHTSWdiz5RVuI-yKopgU8alLIHC9v1wLDPYH94HZjOYxTl2FUmzsdkTEadnS&typo=1
> > FRIAM-COMIC
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,YLbOcA9Ds-tnle2QH8a32PjQ7NAIR-vsh3V7-HXqTzKV4PukKncRYMuEpmRjp67iN-X_yErpzaipLwaWISoACSSYk8Mt-rsnjOXWyeRFV2gvxJ0q&typo=1
> > archives: 5/2017 thru present
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,NXJ4PVoN2eyJn6xZtIL1pM97mWi-ZIVUv0tLzz2UWJg50A0Vnm3Z8sMdhc8kirWmB4vdqOGvSO3k4NbKXdGMZYEP_cTp8bRN3Us38T4dDYc,&typo=1
> > 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
>
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives: 5/2017 thru present
> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Tom Johnson - tom at jtjohnson.com
> +1 505 577 6482
> Santa Fe, New Mexico USA
>
> *New Mexico Writers <https://nmwriters.org/>*++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives: 5/2017 thru present
> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
>
>
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>
> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
> archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>
> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives: 5/2017 thru present
> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
>
>
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>
> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>
> archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>
> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives: 5/2017 thru present
> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives: 5/2017 thru present
> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20250306/400118bf/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Friam
mailing list