thank you sir for this clarification
i was thinking i was getting buffaloed
but this is actually excellent
also i would just like to add
our own nonnormal scientific pursuit of punctology at bp
may still prove to be actually scientific & conventionally valuable
in much the same way as maths are often developed before their applications
are ever thought of
& my own sense is that our highly trained & specially focussed bp kind of
thought is of such fine acuity as to be out of range of normal scientific
thinking
unlike mere stamp collecting etc
so everyone just wait til the killer apps for it are realized
that will be a whole new freakin world
m
>From: David
>Not exactly. Boundary pointing, and chasing geographic oddities, etc. is a
>great hobby. And in hobbies, "to each his/her own" rules the day. I know
>what I am interested in, and not interested in, and my interests change.
>
>Research and (post)graduate studies in geography are part of my
>profession, and certain standards of performance and topic apply, many of
>which a share with my academic colleagues. I doubt if one could get a
>Master's degree in geography for a good stamp collection, for example. My
>opinions on what consitute legitimate topics for graduate study in
>geography at Buffalo carry considerable weight, although my colleages
>certainly vary in their opinions.
>
>I think there is some overlap between scholarly research topics that would
>form a legitimate target for graduate research at Buffalo in geography,
>philosophy, or political science (-- yes indeed, "normal scientific
>pursuit"!), and the topics of interest to most boundary-pointers. But only
>a small overlap. But most boundary point activities, I think should not
>"count" toward a graduate degree anywhere in any discipline, no more than
>stamp collecting or a good golf score (or in my case, a good bird
>list) would "count" to toward a graduate degree.
>
>The original question was what university to go to to pursue
>(post)graduate work related to boundaries, enclaves, etc. To the extent
>that there are legitimate scholarly nuggets and problems within the
>boundarypoint domain, I still think Buffalo would be a good place for
>academic study of those topics.
>
>David
>
>On Tue, 19 Mar 2002, m donner wrote:
>
> > david
> > do i understand correctly
> > first you offer us fellow uniquely empassioned geonuts a good place to
> > pursue boundary pointing interests
> > but then you limit us to what you personally think is very interesting
> > & from that you whittle us down to what is also popular
> > & finally from all that down to normal scientific pursuit
> >
> > & may i also ask you as my fellow charter member of bp whether you
> > understand that this site is primarily & expressly devoted not to
>scientific
> > pursuit but to the physical pursuit of multisovereign boundary points
> > because these are the actual boundarypoint interests
> > while ordinary boundary interests per se are necessarily secondary &
> > derivative here
> >
> > & the only sciences here are those of joyriding & laser thinking
> > or perhaps of punctology
> > if we play doctor
> >
> > m
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: David Mark
> > >
> > >As you may recall, I don't think mixed-level multi-points are very
> > >interesting. Personally, the various kinds of territory at sea leave me
> > >completely cold. I wonder if 99 % of the public agree with me, or 1 %?
> > >I find it mildly interesting to document the extent to which various
> > >hierarchical jurisdictions such as town, county, province, state,
>nation
> > >extend out into ocean water or out into lakes, etc.
> > >
> > >Anyway, one could come up with a formal typology of administrative
> > >multipoints, that took account of how many regions/boundaries meet at
>the
> > >multipoint, and what level in the geopolitical hierarchy the regions
>are.
> > >We might define a homogeneous multipoint as a point at which three or
>more
> > >regions of the same level meet, tri-state, tri-county, tri-nation
>points.
> > >Inhomogeneous points would be mixed-- eg two states and another
>country.
> > >
> > >I am not sure what if any the scientific questions to be researched
>would
> > >be.
> > >
> > >David
> > >
> > >On Mon, 11 Mar 2002, acroorca2002 wrote:
> > >
> > > > wonderful david
> > > >
> > > > can we study & inventory the federal multipoints of canada there
>with
> > > > particular reference to the federal maritime territory
> > > >
> > > > i mean can we make a really scientific politico geographico mereo
> > > > topology of all canadian territory
> > > >
> > > > i find most people
> > > > even well educated canadians
> > > > still think canada has only 4 primary multipoints & only 3 federal
> > > > territories
> > > >
> > > > m
> > > >
> > > > --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., David Mark <dmark@g...> wrote:
> > > > > Buffalo! With myself in Geography, plus political geographer
>Meghan
> > > > Cope,
> > > > > plus Barry Smith in Philosophy, and Munroe Eagles in political
> > > > science,
> > > > > Buffalo would be a good place to pursue BoundaryPoint interests at
> > > > the
> > > > > (post)graduate level.
> > > > >
> > > > > David
> > > > > http://www.geog.buffalo.edu/~dmark/
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, timothykiser wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > as a fellow geography nut, i'm hoping that some of you may be
>able
> > > > to
> > > > > > suggest potential geography grad school programs. like most
> > > > everyone
> > > > > > in this group, my geographical passions are unique. i welcome
>any
> > > > > > insight or suggestions.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > my areas of interest are socio/cultural and political geography.
> > > > > > those topics closest to my heart are enclaves/exclaves,
> > > > micronations,
> > > > > > and linguistic geography (anglo/french canada and quebec,
>basque,
> > > > and
> > > > > > rhaeto-romance. by the way, i'm currently living in chicago.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > thanks!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > tim
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > >http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
>
_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger:
http://messenger.msn.com