Topic: | Re:Re:Representations of John and Carmens latest developments |
Posted by: | Thomas |
Date/Time: | 13/05/2002 02:06:02 |
Carmen and John! I very much look forward to your future coverage of the New Code Patterns. I have enjoyed using the new code games to quite some extent, and have changed a myriad of behaviors with their help. On the other hand there are still a number of changes I have failed to achieve with their help (up until this point in time). Some times I have only gotten the kind of change one would expect from a first order change technique when applied to a complex problem, i.e. problem is blown away, but returns after a brief holiday. But I think that what I am after is perhaps something on a different level. Perhaps a better way of phrasing my original question would had been: "What would constitute evidence that the new code change format does NOT work as claimed by its presenters?" Or is a specification of disconfirming evidence beyond the responsibility of the presenter? (Obviously disconfirmative evidence hopefully does fall outside a description of the consequences of using a pattern ...) Best regards Thomas |
Topic | Date Posted | Posted By |
Representations of John and Carmens latest developments | 06/05/2002 02:38:52 | Thomas |
Re:Representations of John and Carmens latest developments | 09/05/2002 18:44:18 | John Grinder and Carmen Bostic |
Re:Re:Representations of John and Carmens latest developments | 13/05/2002 02:05:56 | Thomas |
Re:Re:Representations of John and Carmens latest developments | 13/05/2002 02:06:02 | Thomas |
Re:Representations of John and Carmens latest developments | 12/05/2002 08:30:42 | Kepler Rose |
Re:Re:Representations of John and Carmens latest developments | 13/05/2002 03:55:31 | Sara |