RE: References for "The Magic Number" and more examples of the number 7

[edunn -at- transport -dot- bombardier -dot- com]

In response to Donald Le Vie:
And that's the problem with all the rules discussions. Very few 'rules' are
intended to cover all situations. Also many arbitrary 'rules' do apply to all
situations if rewritten or generalised. That is 'rule of 7' = argument, 'make
procedures as short as possible'=agreement. Indeed in this long drawn out and
oft repeated thread many of the conter arguments to the 'rule of seven' are
saying just that. But instead of comming to this agreement the antagonists break
into the familiar camps of absolutes and start lobbing bombs at each other (with
a few poor souls caught in the cross-fire).

However, I will stand by my claim of personal opinion playing a greater role on
the list than quoted studies. It is an old and rather pathetic trick (only less
pathetic than defining a truism, and both are punishable if pointed out by the
oposition) in debating societies to pull up some obscure study or report and
then base the debate on it. The lack of knowledge of the study by the oposition
gives them no counter arguments. While basing one's argument on an accepted
authority is good form and adds credibility, in an open forum, knowledge of
arcane acedemic studies or even widely distributed ones can not be taken for
granted. Quoting them then requires at least a summary of the issues and the
conclusions.

Even then the summary and the conclusions are often heavily influenced by
opinion of the person summarizing. Look only to the fact that acedemics and
specialists in various fields continuously debate the findings and conclusions
of even the most fundamental of studies. Unless you can yourself support the
reasons for your arguments (or at least rephrase the study in your own words)
the discussion becomes an empty and dry contest of who can 'drop the most
names'. I don't think the spirit of TECHWR-L is meant to be as rigorous as that
of scientific debate. If somebody disagrees with an assertion, even on a hunch
or personal opinion, then I would think it is up to the defendant of the
assertion to further explain/expand the findings of the study being discussed. I
think it would also be of proper form to acknowledge any possible exceptions
before countering as well.

After all this long winded philosophizing (or was that pontificating?), I must
offer my applogies for any misdirected wrath that may have been taken
personnally. I had been skimming the whole thread (as there seemed to be more
chaff than wheat and even the good stuff I had seen before) when I decided to
visit the various web sites. As such I remembered neither the poster nor the
exact wording of the post to which I responded. I only remembered my impression
of where the topic had gone. If I was out of line I apologize.

Eric L. Dunn



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Develop HTML-based Help with Macromedia Dreamweaver! (STC Discount.)
**NEW DATE/LOCATION!** January 16-17, 2001, New York, NY.
http://www.weisner.com/training/dreamweaver_help.htm or 800-646-9989.

Take XML and Tech Writing courses online!  Our instructor-led courses
(4-6 hrs/wk) give you "hands on" experience at your convenience. STC members
get 20% off!  http://www.online-learning.com/index.html.
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit 
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.