technoLAHgy v0.15c - (Haven't really been) Monitoring Malaysian Inventions

Trust me, I really appreciate your time in responding to this topic issue.

On the scientific observation level, I agree with your idea, that with enough information, we can select information that we can argue, for and/or against, a position that we agree and have decided upon, based on our past observations and sequential result of the understandings of the outcome.

I understand the lack of an agreement this blog has with its readers, where the only public description of the motivation of this blog, has been put forth, but not made clearly here.

I will post here now, the expectations that this blog was meant to serve, as expressed by Aizuddin Danian when technoLAHgy was selected to be part of the PetalingSteet project.

"Also, i'm pleased to announce another member of the PPS - "technoLAHgy"
(http://www.yat.ch/lah/). I've been visiting their blog lately and its regularly updated with good content related to Malaysian tech and innovation. Consider the following:

TechnoLAHgist goals, missions, purposes, objectives
- to track all Malaysian-based patents submitted to USPTO.
- to foster innovation management thinking
- to relate Malaysian innovations to the larger picture
- to keep notes handy (more like Vannevar Bush's idea of a memex)
- to attract more technology feedback
- to get more Malaysian bloggers on tech issues

I think they will be an excellent addition to the group and i hope everyone will make them feel welcome."

Blogging is communal activity work, where the blogger implicitly accepts and understands where his/her objectives are, and that they are understood. I recognized that having only communicated those goals to the PPS founders, I have not explicitly informed the readers of this blog of what it is to be expected.

There has been areas that due to my other duties, have failed to deliver, in line with my own expectations of what is achievable. It has been a steep learning curve (though it is still not an excuse that it has been expressed that discussions here are based on amateur observations and perceptions) in attempting to achieve those goals that have been set out.

That however, has also led to the point that the expectations of the readers are not known, but I understand the value and appreciate every comment and moment spent with the work that's put in by the readers and contributers of this blog.

With that off my chest, I would like to thank you for your comment again (because I sincerely appreciate it, and all those that have come in, with exception to the excessive spam that has been growing like weeds around this semi-structured garden of thought), especially not having an expected implicit understanding that we at technoLAHgy had, which is essentially to evaluate ideas.

Your comment does address the core thinking ability and idea evaluation approach at the screening level. I have merely addressed it at the point briefly without much opinion, as I'm waiting for Mr. Bezo's company to deliver the final product, and I understand that while it most probably have breached the expectations that readers had of TechnoLAHgy, it was a breakdown in the process of posting something that had gone through a more thorough thinking process rather than just a quick and easy post of "woah, a pattern I didn't know about!".

So I'll express it clearly here now, what is expected from the readers of this blog.

1. Realize the faults of the argument.
2a. Offer experience to help the posters here understand better of the process that they need to filter and think it through.
2b. Brainstorm on the possible solutions to the faults identified/observed.

Help us in being better, and yes, that was the implicit expectations that we had when this blog started going. That we realized that we needed the space to explore, and hoped to find the folks that see that.

We are looking for mentors and we are looking out to you, with the realization that if we never described the bottleneck that we encountered in our situations, no one would offer help.

On that note, please consider the time in approaching this again, and if possible, entertain the possibility of a "what-if?" that is going on here, that if what the writers of The Fourth Turning stated in their findings, if it continued to be true, or may turn out to be true, what are the changes that should be acted upon, and what are the roles that we can afford to volunteer in ensuring that what is predicted does not occur.

In respect of your (readers) time, we agree to ensure the following in each post as part of the process: -

- Categorization of posts:
e.g. - "Has anyone have heard about these issues?"
-"This sounds plausible"
-"We agree with this"
-"We don't agree with this, and we're posting it here because we feel that it is retarded"
-"Just want to remember this and have a few friends check this out and bring up the issue over beer someday"

The initial reasoning of posting this before the book reached us, was to deliver the "keep notes handy", "attract more technology feedback", "relate Malaysian innovations to the larger picture".

I do not wish to go off tangent drilling down to the relationships of the post to the ideas (implicit understanding expectations). So I will end here, agreeing that it might seem as a cop out, and thus pose the question of, is a larger trend line be possible and accurate?

I am in the school of thought, that the facts be evaluated first, before jumping to conclusions, but of course, society today does not foster a better habit of allowing everyone to participate and contribute at that level.

And with that, I thank you for your introduction, which I have had to assume was implicit with your offering of your blog's url, that I have to have had a reading relationship with you, to recognize, understand and relate with your thinking process. Without which, I am sure to jump into conclusions."