[Imc-alternatives] [content] solidifying new taxonomy

[Jay]

Hi,

I agree with Josef (who was agreeing with me :) that we may as well 
use the "12 around one" taxonomy.  Using it would give our project 
some continuity with other thought that's gone on in the alternatives world.

Can we possibly solidify this decision by Saturday's code-a-thon? 
(more information about the code-a-thon to come later today),

Jay

At 12/2/2008, you wrote:
>2008/12/1 Jay <jay at fundamentalchange.net>:
> > Sheri and all,
> >
> > I've been thinking about the taxonomy.  What do people think about our
> > directly using the Barbara Marx Hubbard/Buckminster Fuller "12 around one"
> > categories (giving full credit to them for designing it, of course)?
>
>
>I think they've done a good a job and wouldn't mind using it.
>
>
> > I orignially thought doing that may pigeonhole us, but it does 
> generally seem
> > to satisfy what we're trying to do?  Or do you think that would put us too
> > much in any particular camp?
>
>
>I think it would put us in the systems thinking camp and that that is
>a good thing :P
>
>Josef.
>
>
>--
>Josef Davies-Coates
>07974 88 88 95
>http://uniteddiversity.com
>Together We Have Everything
>_______________________________________________
>Imc-alternatives mailing list
>Imc-alternatives at lists.indymedia.org
>http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-alternatives