Jack, et al -- ...and then Jack Bertram said... % % * Andrew Sayers <andrew-list-mutt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [031103 14:24]: % % Whether or not there is an official psychological definition, two points % apply here: % % - Firstly, and to your point, given that everyone "knows" that a steep % learning curve is a hard one, people won't know what you're talking % about if you refer to a shallow learning curve So? "Everyone" "knows" that Outhouse is a mail program, but not many here (and definitely not I :-) are content to go that route or even let the assumption stand. % % - Secondly, the reason people talk about a learning curve in the first % place is because they view it in two other dimensions: progress and Not necessarily. Not at all indeed. Not I, for instance. I visualize the learning curve as the path from "not knowing" (low) to "knowing" (high), and climbing that height in less time (left to right) is good; the steeper the better. The curve is an indication of both how much effort is going in and how capable one is. % effort. A hill is a one-dimensional reduction of these two dimensions, % where moving the same distance (as the crow files) takes more effort Well, that's one way to look at a hill. % when the hill is steep. In the everyday context, the psychological % definition is so much irrelevance. So is this thread, but we're here anyway. % % j HAND :-D -- David T-G * There is too much animal courage in (play) davidtg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx * society and not sufficient moral courage. (work) davidtgwork@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Mary Baker Eddy, "Science and Health" http://justpickone.org/davidtg/ Shpx gur Pbzzhavpngvbaf Qrprapl Npg!
Attachment:
pgpnWhUHSAoh9.pgp
Description: PGP signature