Talk:Procruste: Difference between revisions
(force feeding with what ?) |
No edit summary |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
a sort of a troll fighting against standardization... | a sort of a troll fighting against standardization... | ||
: why, then't there any trolls fighting *for* standardization? | |||
:: in fact if you are, then you are engaged in [[extreme standard]]s | |||
---- | ---- | ||
Shouldn't this article be in [[Wikipedia]]. This isn't really relevant to our [[Consumerium:FAQ|goal]] | Shouldn't this article be in [[Wikipedia]]. This isn't really relevant to our [[Consumerium:FAQ|goal]] | ||
:We should have a minimum definition here, since for [[Consumerium]] we care about [[label]]s and thus [[standard]]s, consider variance in types of [http://www.internet-encyclopedia.info/wiki.phtml?title=Truth Truth (IE version)] and [http://disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Point_of_view point of view (from the propagandists)], his story can be told in a way relevant to that. For instance the variation in [[ecoregion]]s should lead to different standards. So P for you in his own ecoregion is fair, but him coming to yours is not, he with his KitKat McFlurry! | |||
---- | ---- | ||
Well...I | Well...I did not mention it was also a kamasutra position, which "would" have been irrelevant here... | ||
But...I had the feeling it was relevant here, as I believe one of the threat a consumer is meeting is the attempt to reduce him/her to one standard. | |||
:[[Homogenity]] is very good for the [[capitalist]] [[market economy]], since everybody will [[work]]/[[consume]] much harder to gain some difference from the rest of the people, if everyone desires the same things. [[Heterogenity]] on the other hand is better for the [[planet]] since people don't have to strive so much to feel oneself as an individual, thus reducing the [[ecological]] strain caused by people. | |||
Such as most food portions being adapted to a family of four. Or directing a whole population to eat one product rather than a variety, or for everyone to eat more salty than before to increase drinks sales. To feed everyone with Mac Donald, even if that require small adaptations depending on countries. hum | |||
:HumHum. The consumers get what they want or they get what the marketing people believe the consumers could be tricked to believe to want. No? | |||
::Very true. Now, if you are single, marketing people will have a tough time convincing one, that he wants to eat the same dinner four days in a row. Okay, my potatoes are cooked. | |||
------- | |||
Trolls consider this relevant, metaphorically, like [[world tree]]. | |||
There are only a half dozen or so of such concepts. But this is one. | |||
Latest revision as of 01:25, 24 August 2004
a sort of a troll fighting against standardization...
- why, then't there any trolls fighting *for* standardization?
- in fact if you are, then you are engaged in extreme standards
Shouldn't this article be in Wikipedia. This isn't really relevant to our goal
- We should have a minimum definition here, since for Consumerium we care about labels and thus standards, consider variance in types of Truth (IE version) and point of view (from the propagandists), his story can be told in a way relevant to that. For instance the variation in ecoregions should lead to different standards. So P for you in his own ecoregion is fair, but him coming to yours is not, he with his KitKat McFlurry!
Well...I did not mention it was also a kamasutra position, which "would" have been irrelevant here...
But...I had the feeling it was relevant here, as I believe one of the threat a consumer is meeting is the attempt to reduce him/her to one standard.
- Homogenity is very good for the capitalist market economy, since everybody will work/consume much harder to gain some difference from the rest of the people, if everyone desires the same things. Heterogenity on the other hand is better for the planet since people don't have to strive so much to feel oneself as an individual, thus reducing the ecological strain caused by people.
Such as most food portions being adapted to a family of four. Or directing a whole population to eat one product rather than a variety, or for everyone to eat more salty than before to increase drinks sales. To feed everyone with Mac Donald, even if that require small adaptations depending on countries. hum
- HumHum. The consumers get what they want or they get what the marketing people believe the consumers could be tricked to believe to want. No?
- Very true. Now, if you are single, marketing people will have a tough time convincing one, that he wants to eat the same dinner four days in a row. Okay, my potatoes are cooked.
Trolls consider this relevant, metaphorically, like world tree.
There are only a half dozen or so of such concepts. But this is one.