New Rules of War

[William F. Owen]

"The finest glasses for both technical and hedonistic purposes are those made by Riedel. The effect of these glasses on fine wine is profound. I cannot emphasize enough what a difference they make." (Quelle: Robert M. Parker, Jr. The Wine Advocate)

...and my wife would argue that only "pu**ies" drink beer from glasses - and it should be drunk from the bottle or can.

...am I missing the point?

[Firn]

...and my wife would argue that only "pu**ies" drink beer from glasses - and it should be drunk from the bottle or can.

...am I missing the point?

Perhaps, if you look at the first post of this thread.

Packaging, labeling, marketing are all part of the game, be it a wine (-glass) or idea business thus the phrase of the old wine in new bottles. The author of the article relies greatly on the shiny wordbottles to reinforce some of his better ideas and to create attention for them, but he sadly fails to support his arguments. He still benefits through this article, but not so the target audience, as he may harm the good ideas.


Firn

P.S: Wine or beer, can or glass, it all depends on the METT-T.

[marct]

Hi Firn,

Packaging, labeling, marketing are all part of the game, be it a wine (-glass) or idea business thus the phrase of the old wine in new bottles. The author of the article relies greatly on the shiny wordbottles to reinforce some of his better ideas and to create attention for them, but he sadly fails to support his arguments. He still benefits through this article, but not so the target audience, as he may harm the good ideas.

Okay, I going to play scholarly pissant here, the but best translation of the phrase (meme actually) is "old wine in new skins" *not bottles). The reference, IMO, goes back to the absolute stupidity of anyone who would take something good (old wine) and put it into a new container that will make it less good, especially since the new wine skin will change the flavour and, quite possibly, split. It's not a reference to the presentation of the wine, it's a reference to the storage of the wine .

Now, on the presentation front, I am all in favour of crystal, especially for good reds. You can ruin the taste of a good wine by using a presentation vessel that changes / destroys its taste; like using a silver goblet for anything but a very sweet red or mead .

P.S: Wine or beer, can or glass, it all depends on the METT-T.

Nah, never drink beer from a can unless it's already in the making love in a canoe category !

[wm]

Okay, I going to play scholarly pissant here, the but best translation of the phrase (meme actually) is "old wine in new skins" *not bottles). The reference, IMO, goes back to the absolute stupidity of anyone who would take something good (old wine) and put it into a new container that will make it less good, especially since the new wine skin will change the flavour and, quite possibly, split. It's not a reference to the presentation of the wine, it's a reference to the storage of the wine

From one pedantic pissant to another--
I think the original reference is at Mark 2:22:

And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the wine will burst the skins, and both the wine and the wineskins will be ruined. No, he pours new wine into new wineskins.

The problem is that new wine has not yet finished fermenting. Thus, it could give off more gas, causing the wineskin to expand. An old wineskin, having dried out, is less likely to be able to expand. To relieve the additional pressure, it will split instead.

Maybe, on this analysis, my difficulty with design is that I am indeed trying to put new wine in an old skin--my old conceptual framework (the old wineskin) may be unable to grok the material that is expressed in FM 5.0 under the rubric of design (the new wine).

[marct]

From one pedantic pissant to another--
I think the original reference is at Mark 2:22:

Drat, knew I should have tracked the reference down rather than rely on insufficiently caffeinated memory! Thanks for the correction, WM.

Maybe, on this analysis, my difficulty with design is that I am indeed trying to put new wine in an old skin--my old conceptual framework (the old wineskin) may be unable to grok the material that is expressed in FM 5.0 under the rubric of design (the new wine).

Maybe, but from what I am seeing, it's not "new wine" at all. I'm still slogging through on a line by line read right now....

[William F. Owen]

It took an e-mail of a lurker to remind me of a central point I made recently while speaking in the UK, in reference to Tet.

The flow down effects of the Tet Offensive were because they really happened, not because they got reported and photographed on TV. Media cannot make decisive events "more decisive," in any way that it can make irrelevant events decisive. Media is NOT instrumental. It's merely illustrative.

The only way it can be instrumental to policy is when it actually misleads the policy maker, as the relevance of an event. - something policy makers should not let happen. Accurate reporting can only report real events with real effects.

[Fuchs]

I think the point wasn't about reporting, it was about propaganda and the Americans have their own Dolchstoßlegende that asserts that their own media & Jane Fonda became propagandists for the enemy.

Propaganda, of course, can influence will quite apart from real events.