Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!husc6!rutgers!lll-lcc!pyramid!hplabs!hplabsc!taylor
From: SHEIZAF@HBUNOS.BITNET (Sheizaf Rafaeli)
Newsgroups: comp.society
Subject: re: Writing or Otherwise
Message-ID: <1743@hplabsc.HP.COM>
Date: Wed, 6-May-87 21:21:05 EDT
Article-I.D.: hplabsc.1743
Posted: Wed May  6 21:21:05 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 9-May-87 01:54:42 EDT
Sender: taylor@hplabsc.HP.COM
Distribution: world
Lines: 27
Approved: taylor@hplabs

Ray Chen writes:

> Written information has one advantage ... the assimilation of the 
> information can be controlled by the .. receiver.

and Brian Ogilvie replies:

> A written format ... where responses are transmitted quickly, has most of 
> the advantages of both media and few of the disadvantages...

     Clearly this is not a horse race between media. Each have functions
     and dysfunctions. I liked the point about relationship between
     bandwidth and amount of interpretation. Is this relation curvilinear,
     in the sense that too much bandwidth results in
     noise, uninterpretability? Any other examples or counter examples?

     I would like to suggest that written media have the advantage (function)
     of being under the ***communicator's*** complete control. The point here
     is that written communication, archaic as it may be, will not disappear
     because of the continuing demand on the part of sources, not receivers.
     Perhaps Brian and Ray prefer written to spoken modes 'cause they get
     **SLOWER** retorts or response.

     I know I've written this here rather than talk or write directly to 
     Ray and Brian hoping they would never see it. Any questions?

Sheizaf Rafaeli