It would be an interesting question to determine. At this point, I am
kind of in a 'stasis field' awaiting an outcome that prevents me from
getting involved in any kind of new group activity. Can't say anything
about it publicly but will know by 1st quarter 1999.
You also wrote;
> By the way, making a fixed contribution to such an endeavor seems
> besides the point. I'm personaly not all that interested in
> 'equality', I know what I can afford and I'd gladly share equal
> footing with someone who can afford less, but would like to
> contribute none the less. I'd also feel the same way towards
> someone who could afford more <g>. At the end of such a project
> nobody should expect anything more than the resulting information.
> It is the resulting information that represents the real value -
> not the machine.
That is so true, and I agree, people should contribute what they feel
such information would be worth to them personally. How much have we
each spent each year on books, subscriptions, conferences, phone calls,
'plans' and all kinds of information that we hope will be for real and
which never is?
The question I think that will be asked, are there any guarantees of
success...well, no, its after all R&D, but in my opinion, CLEM offers
the best hope for a self-running mechanical device at this time and that
information should be freely shared.
Then we get into the mindset of the potential investors, why should I
participate if I won't get anything back except plans or why should I
participate since others will do it and I'll get it for free
anyway....<g>...
Has to be special people as sponsors of such projects, people who have
vision and want to help make some changes, not the run of the mill
greedy, selfish bunch who can't see beyond the next instant
gratification session.
-- Jerry Wayne Decker / jdecker@keelynet.com http://keelynet.com / "From an Art to a Science" Voice : (214) 324-8741 / FAX : (214) 324-3501 KeelyNet - PO BOX 870716 - Mesquite - Republic of Texas - 75187