Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by IjonTichyIjonTichy (talk | contribs) at 16:48, 19 July 2012. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hello Earl King Jr. (talk) 04:21, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, and please go to what ever page is being discussed and we can hold the conversation there. Earl King Jr. (talk) 17:09, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Resource-based economy". Thank you. --IjonTichyIjonTichy (talk) 05:51, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your work

I'm sorry about the misunderstanding(s) we had. I apologize. Thank you for your good work on Resource-based economy. I'm looking forward to continuing to cooperate with you on improving future articles. Regards and best wishes, IjonTichyIjonTichy (talk) 17:02, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "The Zeitgeist Movement". Thank you. --IjonTichyIjonTichy (talk) 17:08, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Resource-Based Economy; Alternative use

"The term resource-based economy is also applied to a hypothetical economy in which goods, services and information are produced with such efficiency and abundance as to render them free to the public."

I originally modified that statement for greater up-front clarification. Hearing someone say, "You can have everything for free" leads you to a very different conclusion than what hearing, "The social and technical hyper-efficiency will allow us to produce goods in such abundance that, based on the Law of Supply and Demand, the price will be so insignificant that it would be essentially free." I understand that it isn't exactly necessary, however, as a member of TZM, I know firsthand how much reading is involved to understand why society will be capable of providing free access to everything and quickly reading 'you can have everything for free' can be very misleading.

Lagesvantner (talk) 17:23, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

As a member of Zeitgeist you have to be careful because if you make their point of view that would not be neutral. An overview of information has to be used from neutral sources and third party or second party writing. Zeitgeist and Venus Project and Technocracy groups all have different view points of a resource based economy and they differ from each other. In all three of those theories the basics of life are free though. Please bring any further comments you have to the talk page of the article in question. Thanks. Earl King Jr. (talk) 00:57, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

But you are right that they are two very different things to say. The Venus Project has clearly so far been saying the first: That you can have everything for free. TZM has followed this, I don't know if they are changing the tune (IjonTichyIjonTichy seems to think so). And, seeing your second comment: Yes it *is* utopian. TVP/TZM are utopian groups and so is the technocracy movement. Hence its' not misleading. --OpenFuture (talk) 07:04, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "The Zeitgeist Movement". Thank you. --IjonTichyIjonTichy (talk) 00:31, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. IjonTichyIjonTichy (talk) 16:48, 19 July 2012 (UTC)