Summary of "Define the Structure of Poi" Please

Everyone pretty much came out of the discussion in the same place where it started... though SOME progress was made.

GlitterGirl, aka GG, aka Isa, proposed a new way of thinking about poi. Keep in mind she DOES NOT come at this from the HOP-derrived vocabulary that most people share, but rather by creating her own notation and vocabulary. She's a bit stubborn (though she claims otherwise) and although she changes some of her notation to fit other peoples' frameworks (yay!) she also doesn't really get that other people have already established a framework... and that her framework can be adapted (with some work) to match what already exists. Hopefully won't disappear but will also hopefully understand why she should engage the greater community.

Rev chooses to act as defender of The Spherculism Way... words and names for moves based on HOP and other sites, plus his own analysis and conversations with Matt. Unfortunately, Rev chooses to spend a lot of time poking holes in GG's ideas and just generally antagonizing her. Although very analytical (and obviously broadly educated - yay Liberal Arts educations!), he somehow thinks repeating the same arguments will somehow bash his conclusion into GG's head. He is obviously frustrated and his frustration clouds his ability to find common ground with GG. Brave soul.

Simian. Nice guy. Met him at Spitz during one of my 4 appearances there... Early herald of the no-one-right-perspective approach, though also proponent of agreeing on a standard, as I recall.

Orbit (me). In trying to understand and mediate between the two sides probably end up looking wishy washy to both sides. Hopefully will survive this conversation with some semblance of respect from somebody (okay, GG, I know what you're going to say.. hey, it works for me)... At some point I bring up that move-based way of thinking about poi, while useful for talking about poi, doesn't begin to describe what more advanced spinners do with poi. I think that's why GG is trying to break it down to smaller bits than moves... in order to describe what I think of as FLOW-based poi (largely improvised routines where the poi just go places without necessarily always falling into a pattern).

Matt. Wisely stays out of the whole affair, though gives Rev big thumbs up... probably mainly because he's annoyed with GG more than agreeing completely with Rev. Gotta love politics.

Nix. HOP Poi guru (is Ninja the right term?)... read his posts. He's wrong about the sentences example, but who cares. He's obviously had far too many of these types of conversations in the past. Understands that spinning doesn't stop at the moves and patterns, that at some point the names of moves breaks down -- but also understands that they are a system that we can use to discuss poi.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong here anywhere. My previous draft was more entertaining, but waaayyy too long.