From: claird@NeoSoft.com (Cameron Laird)
Subject: Re: Judith Mth that collections of
    local peak-climbing moves will get us adequately
    close to our global optimum.
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 13:43:14 GMT

z
Tom Peters and some business journalists give the impression
that CPI is in the little things:  one lone operative in the
Rockies hiring a helicopter to get the parcel through, one
production team voting to rationalize its break schedule.  I
suspect there's some rugged-individualist Americana in this.
At the same time, I know how easy it is to abstract my work-table
illumination problem to the point where we'd have a fantastic ROI,
but we're unable to accomplish anything definite ("no, this is
Expires: 
need to provide adequate lighting for all the welders--no, we
have to make sure that lclaird
Caitlin
tm
trn
nn   R

wwDaclaird@litwin.com
Followup-To: 
Distribution: 
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Keywords: 

In article <1992Dec28.021009.1208@netcom.com> tmaddox@netcom.com (Tom Maddox) writes:
>In article <BzuIFF.3q7@NeoSoft.com> claird@NeoSoft.com (Cameron Laird) writes:
>>In article <Bzs03t.KKH@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk> jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin) writes:
>>>hhenderson@vax.clarku.edu quoted Tom Maddox:
>>>> I'm much more concerned with whether people are being interesting, witty,
>>>> enlightening, provocative.  In short, when it comes to public exchanges of
>>>> the written word, I would hold up Oscar Wilde or Dorothy Parker as exemplars
>>>> rather than Miss Manners.  
>>Am I reading a different Miss Manners than everyone else? I
>>regard her as with O. Wilde and D. Parker, not against.
>
>	Perhaps so.  I withdraw the implication that Miss Manners is not
>witty.  
>
>>Maybe *that*'s the fundamental r.a.b. problem:  the nasty
>>posters here have forgotten that great wit needs constraints--
>>for example, those of grammatical elegance, superficial
>>courtesy, objective correlatives, and so on--to be at its best.
>
>	And maybe not.  While your presciption for "great wit" is both
>concise and superficially plausible, it is suitable more to some idealized
>18th century drawing room than to a late 20th century computer newsgroup.
>
>	And in any case, both Dorothy Parker and Oscar Wilde could be 
>discourteous when they felt the situation called for it.  For instance,
>Ms. Parker's remarks in the guest book at Hearst Castle--I can't guarantee
>the accuracy of the quote, which goes something like:
>
>	Upon my honor,
>	I saw a madonna
>	Above the door
>	Of the private whore
>	Of the world's biggest son of a bitch . . .
>
>Or words to that effect--which, no matter how you construe them, will not
>count as superficially polite.
>
>	In fact, the whole notion of holding up anyone in particular as 
>exemplary for posting to r.a.b. suddenly strikes me as ludicrous.  Given the
>actual _dramatis personae_ here--their incredible diversity of education, 
>talent, diction, etc.--any such attempt can only be repressive.  So I'll
>withdraw not only Miss Manners but also Mr. Wilde and Ms. Parker (though
>I'll keep my high regard for them). 
>
>>>I'd hold them up as exemplars, too.  People who produced a small output
>>>with every superfluous word excised.  I suspect that Parker's collected
>>>short stories amount to fewer words than some posters put out here in a
>>>year.
>
>	We are not writing short stories here, I would remind Mr. Campin.
>More suitable grounds for comparison would be the cut-and-slash that 
>apparently characterized Parker & Co. in more informal venues, from letters
>to conversation.  
>-- 
>				Tom Maddox
>		    	    tmaddox@netcom.com
>	"That's a bird bone, chair, Bob.  I don't know if I should sit there."
>				Tom Waits


-- 

Cameron Laird
claird@Neosoft.com (claird%Neosoft.com@uunet.uu.net)	+1 713 267 7966
claird@litwin.com (claird%litwin.com@uunet.uu.net)  	+1 713 996 8546