orange. continues to hold this blog’s methodology slam title, offering a new interpretation of what’s really going on, for all who have been confused by L Magee’s ontology-matching experiment: orange. suggests that it’s later than we think. What LM has been calling a “pre-alpha” software development phase is no such thing: in reality, the software is fully developed, and the experiment’s on us!!! The cat’s out of the bag now, LM: admit it – you’re just studying what academics do when you throw them out of their comfort zone, and place them in a state of confusion: do we bluff, nod sagely, and pretend that we know what’s going on? Do we lash out and start tossing citations? How confusing does the environment actually have to be, before we fess up and admit we have no idea what’s going on?
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
Rough Theory 
Look, when I signed you up as the publicist, this wasn’t exactly what I had in mind. Viral marketing is so ’98. Where, I continue to ask, are the Google ads? What is the value proposition? I think we need to establish clear KPI’s to realise the ROI in this, before I continue to invest in further Web 2.0 “rough theory” hype. The whole “Hegel” thing was fine, but how was implementing world’s best practice via Derrida and Searle ever going to get us to IPO? Where is the promised synergy between Chomsky and our VC money?
Did like the stuff about “Man is born free, but everywhere is in supply chains” though – can possibly leverage that.
Need a response ASAP.
Yours,
Not happy.
“..of what’s really going on”
Thx for the decent reminder, N. *smile
No method slamming by my side, actually.
Or I shall completely reverse my understanding of the term which goes like “historian criticizes an academic representation of historical anthropology for its nonexistant Quellenkritik” and not like “n00b criticizes academic experiment on doctoral level on web 3.0”–see?
So that’s why there’s that giant mouse wheel and maze in the corner of the site…