[From Fred Nickols (2012.09.06.0725 PDT)]
A friend sent me this little exercise. I wonder how PCT accounts for it.
While sitting, raise your right leg and rotate it in a clockwise direction. After starting that movement, keep it going while you use your right hand to draw the numeral six in the air. Note what happens.
What’s going on?
Regards,
Fred Nickols
Managing Partner
Distance Consulting LLC
[From Rick Marken (2012.09.06.0900)]
Fred Nickols (2012.09.06.0725 PDT)–
A friend sent me this little exercise. I wonder how PCT accounts for it.
While sitting, raise your right leg and rotate it in a clockwise direction. After starting that movement, keep it going while you use your right hand to draw the numeral six in the air. Note what happens.
Whats going on?
Very interesting. My guess is that what is going on is hierarchical control. Apparently the system in our brains that controls the perception of direction of movement is at a higher level than the systems that produce the muscle forces that move our limbs. So when you rotate the leg clockwise you are controlling that perception (clockwise motion) by varying the muscle forces appropriately to produce that perception. Now when you try to draw a six with your finger, if you start the six a the top tail you will have to produce that perception by varying you arm muscle forces so as to make a counter clockwise motion with your finger.
Apparently the direction of movement control system is now being used by two still high level systems that want to perceive two different directions of motion; the leg rotation system wants to perceive clockwise movement and the finger drawing a six system wants to perceive counter clockwise movement. The result is a conflict which is resolved by both finger and leg ending up moving in the same direction – for a moment, at least, until it is noticed that you are either no longer moving the leg clockwise or not making the six
. So what’s going on (I think) is a conflict where two higher level control systems – the one trying to perceive the leg moving clockwise and the one trying to perceive the finger drawing a six – are using the same lower level direction of movement control system to produce their desired perceptions: the leg rotation system is trying to make the reference for direction of movement “clockwise” and the finger drawing six system us trying to make the reference for direction of movement “counter-clockwise”.
By the way, you can easily do both – clockwise leg movement and finger drawing a six – by starting the six drawing from the point where the line of the six hits itself and draw the six “backwards”, looping you finger clockwise out from the intersection point.
Best
Rick
–
Richard S. Marken PhD
rsmarken@gmail.com
www.mindreadings.com
[From Fred Nickols (2012.09.06.0940 PDT)]
Thanks, Rick. Nice analysis on your part. By the way, I have a colleague in the Human Performance business who focuses on error management. I seem to recall some of your work had a similar focus. He’s interested in PCT and I thought it might make sense to put the two of you in touch.
Fred Nickols
From: Control Systems Group Network (CSGnet) [mailto:CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU] On Behalf Of Richard Marken
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 8:57 AM
To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU
Subject: Re: An Unusual Phenomenon
[From Rick Marken (2012.09.06.0900)]
Fred Nickols (2012.09.06.0725 PDT)–
A friend sent me this little exercise. I wonder how PCT accounts for it.
While sitting, raise your right leg and rotate it in a clockwise direction. After starting that movement, keep it going while you use your right hand to draw the numeral six in the air. Note what happens.
What’s going on?
Very interesting. My guess is that what is going on is hierarchical control. Apparently the system in our brains that controls the perception of direction of movement is at a higher level than the systems that produce the muscle forces that move our limbs. So when you rotate the leg clockwise you are controlling that perception (clockwise motion) by varying the muscle forces appropriately to produce that perception. Now when you try to draw a six with your finger, if you start the six a the top tail you will have to produce that perception by varying you arm muscle forces so as to make a counter clockwise motion with your finger.
Apparently the direction of movement control system is now being used by two still high level systems that want to perceive two different directions of motion; the leg rotation system wants to perceive clockwise movement and the finger drawing a six system wants to perceive counter clockwise movement. The result is a conflict which is resolved by both finger and leg ending up moving in the same direction – for a moment, at least, until it is noticed that you are either no longer moving the leg clockwise or not making the six
. So what’s going on (I think) is a conflict where two higher level control systems – the one trying to perceive the leg moving clockwise and the one trying to perceive the finger drawing a six – are using the same lower level direction of movement control system to produce their desired perceptions: the leg rotation system is trying to make the reference for direction of movement “clockwise” and the finger drawing six system us trying to make the reference for direction of movement “counter-clockwise”.
By the way, you can easily do both – clockwise leg movement and finger drawing a six – by starting the six drawing from the point where the line of the six hits itself and draw the six “backwards”, looping you finger clockwise out from the intersection point.
Best
Rick
–
Richard S. Marken PhD
rsmarken@gmail.com
www.mindreadings.com
[From Rick Marken (2012.09.06.1100)]
Sure Fred, tell him to get in touch with me (rsmarken@gmail.com). But I’ll be on vacation for the next couple weeks so it would probably be best if he contacted my n the beginning of October.
Best
Rick
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Fred Nickols fred@nickols.us wrote:
[From Fred Nickols (2012.09.06.0940 PDT)]
Thanks, Rick. Nice analysis on your part. By the way, I have a colleague in the Human Performance business who focuses on error management. I seem to recall some of your work had a similar focus. Hes interested in PCT and I thought it might make sense to put the two of you in touch.
Fred Nickols
From: Control Systems Group Network (CSGnet) [mailto:CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU] On Behalf Of Richard Marken
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 8:57 AM
To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU
Subject: Re: An Unusual Phenomenon
[From Rick Marken (2012.09.06.0900)]
Fred Nickols (2012.09.06.0725 PDT)–
A friend sent me this little exercise. I wonder how PCT accounts for it.
While sitting, raise your right leg and rotate it in a clockwise direction. After starting that movement, keep it going while you use your right hand to draw the numeral six in the air. Note what happens.
Whats going on?
Very interesting. My guess is that what is going on is hierarchical control. Apparently the system in our brains that controls the perception of direction of movement is at a higher level than the systems that produce the muscle forces that move our limbs. So when you rotate the leg clockwise you are controlling that perception (clockwise motion) by varying the muscle forces appropriately to produce that perception. Now when you try to draw a six with your finger, if you start the six a the top tail you will have to produce that perception by varying you arm muscle forces so as to make a counter clockwise motion with your finger.
Apparently the direction of movement control system is now being used by two still high level systems that want to perceive two different directions of motion; the leg rotation system wants to perceive clockwise movement and the finger drawing a six system wants to perceive counter clockwise movement. The result is a conflict which is resolved by both finger and leg ending up moving in the same direction – for a moment, at least, until it is noticed that you are either no longer moving the leg clockwise or not making the six
. So what’s going on (I think) is a conflict where two higher level control systems – the one trying to perceive the leg moving clockwise and the one trying to perceive the finger drawing a six – are using the same lower level direction of movement control system to produce their desired perceptions: the leg rotation system is trying to make the reference for direction of movement “clockwise” and the finger drawing six system us trying to make the reference for direction of movement “counter-clockwise”.
By the way, you can easily do both – clockwise leg movement and finger drawing a six – by starting the six drawing from the point where the line of the six hits itself and draw the six “backwards”, looping you finger clockwise out from the intersection point.
Best
Rick
–
Richard S. Marken PhD
rsmarken@gmail.com
www.mindreadings.com
–
Richard S. Marken PhD
rsmarken@gmail.com
www.mindreadings.com
[Martin Taylor 2012.09.06.14.56]
[From Rick Marken (2012.09.06.0900)]
Fred Nickols (2012.09.06.0725 PDT)–
A friend sent me this littleexercise. I wonder how PCT accounts for it.
While sitting, raise your right legand rotate it in a clockwise direction. After starting
that movement, keep it going while you use your right
hand to draw the numeral six in the air. Note what
happens.
What’s going on?
Very interesting. My guess is that what is going on ishierarchical control. Apparently the system in our brains that
controls the perception of direction of movement is at a higher
level than the systems that produce the muscle forces that move
our limbs. So when you rotate the leg clockwise you are
controlling that perception (clockwise motion) by varying the
muscle forces appropriately to produce that perception. Now when
you try to draw a six with your finger, if you start the six a the
top tail you will have to produce that perception by varying you
arm muscle forces so as to make a counter clockwise motion with
your finger.Apparently the direction of movement control system is now beingused by two still high level systems that want to perceive two
different directions of motion; the leg rotation system wants to
perceive clockwise movement and the finger drawing a six system
wants to perceive counter clockwise movement. The result is a
conflict which is resolved by both finger and leg ending up moving
in the same direction – for a moment, at least, until it is
noticed that you are either no longer moving the leg clockwise or
not making the six. So what's going on (I think) is a conflict where two higherlevel control systems – the one trying to perceive the leg moving
clockwise and the one trying to perceive the finger drawing a six
– are using the same lower level direction of movement control
system to produce their desired perceptions: the leg rotation
system is trying to make the reference for direction of movement
“clockwise” and the finger drawing six system us trying to make
the reference for direction of movement “counter-clockwise”.
It's a nice analysis, but I think there might be a different
possibility, or maybe both Rick’s and the following might work
together to create the problem. The other possibility is that the
confusion might be on the perceptual side. It would be interesting
to try this with subjects under hypnosis.
The reason I make this suggestion goes back about thirty years, when
I had a summer student who was studying with a hypnosis researcher
for her graduate degree. I helped them analyze an experiment in
which the subject was exposed to two monaural streams separately or
together. The subject was asked to shadow (speak with no delay the
same words as) the stream in one ear, while pressing a button when
some prespecified item occurred in the other ear stream. When the
subject was unhypnotized, the two streams interfered. They didn’t
shadow as well when they had to detect the “cue item”, and they
didn’t detect the cue item as well if they were also asked to shadow
(d’ detectability theory measure). Under hypnosis, the mutual
interference went away, and the two streams were processed as though
by independent people rather than in the same brain.
My impression of what was happening here is that it is very similar
to what happens with skilled performers in sports or music.
Conscious perception ceased to be involved under hypnosis. When a
performer is learning the new skill, what happens in one place
sometimes confuses the conscious perception of what is going on,
but as skill develops, the different streams begin to be perceived
separately, like the lines in polyphonic music. The skilled
performer has reorganized the perceptual side so that instead of a
meld of sound (in music) what they hear is the separate lines, and
they can selectively attend to any of them (based on personal
experience and what others have said about their experience).
If we accept that what is accessible to conscious perception is a
subset of what is available for control, this would suggest that the
novice performer is much less able to control the individual lines
of music because the perceptions of the lines interfere with each
other. The skilled performer may have interference at the output
side (no pianist can stretch two octaves with each hand
simultaneously), but that is a different matter.
In the case raised by Fred, which is akin to the classic "rub your
stomach while patting your head" challenge, there is no output
conflict between leg movements and hand movements. The conflict may
well be where Rick places it, but it could also at the same time be
a perceptual conflict in which an already organized perception such
as “clockwise rotation” has to be reorganized into two separate
perceptions that include place: “clockwise arm movement” and
“clockwise leg movement”.
Martin
[From Rick Marken (2012.09.09.1110 ADT)]
Martin Taylor (2012.09.06.14.56) –
Hi Martin. Sorry it took a while for me to get back to you. I was finishing up the semester and now I’m off on a geological tour of Nova Scotia with Linda. But I have some time before going off to look at rocks.
I don’t quite understand your explanation of the phenomenon Fred posted. You say that the problem could be on the “perceptual side” but I don’t really understand what you have in mind. There doesn’t seem to be any problem perceiving clockwise or counter clockwise movement of the arm and leg. Are you thinking that this problem can be solved by controlling a different, possibly higher level, perception? Moreover, you seem to change from a perceptual to a consciousness explanation when you see the interference in Fred’s task as similar to what happens in a shadowing task. My experience with shadowing is that the problem is one of attention (which is probably equivalent to the conscious observer in PCT) rather than perception; I can perceive both the shadowed text and the key work to be detected just fine; the problem is shifting attention from one to the other. Or do you think the successful (hypnotized) shadower is perceiving something different than an unhypnotized one?
What I like about my explanation is that it’s simple, it can be pretty easily modeled in terms of the PCT hierarchy (it should be possible to build a working model of the phenomenon) and it can be pretty easily tested (as in the test I did where I simply change the way I was drawing the six so that both my hand and leg motions were clockwise).
It would be interesting to see if one can eventually learn to make simultaneous (and fluid) clockwise and counterclockwise movements of the right leg and arm; it probably is. I’ll try it if Iget another few hours of free time;-)
It’s nice to be up here in Canada. But I brought my suicide pills in case I get sick, knowing how long the waits are for your horrible universal healthcare system;-)
Best
Rick
[From Rick Marken (2012.09.06.0900)]
Fred Nickols (2012.09.06.0725 PDT)–
A friend sent me this littleexercise. I wonder how PCT accounts for it.
While sitting, raise your right legand rotate it in a clockwise direction. After starting
that movement, keep it going while you use your right
hand to draw the numeral six in the air. Note what
happens.
Whats going on?
Very interesting. My guess is that what is going on ishierarchical control. Apparently the system in our brains that
controls the perception of direction of movement is at a higher
level than the systems that produce the muscle forces that move
our limbs. So when you rotate the leg clockwise you are
controlling that perception (clockwise motion) by varying the
muscle forces appropriately to produce that perception. Now when
you try to draw a six with your finger, if you start the six a the
top tail you will have to produce that perception by varying you
arm muscle forces so as to make a counter clockwise motion with
your finger.Apparently the direction of movement control system is now beingused by two still high level systems that want to perceive two
different directions of motion; the leg rotation system wants to
perceive clockwise movement and the finger drawing a six system
wants to perceive counter clockwise movement. The result is a
conflict which is resolved by both finger and leg ending up moving
in the same direction – for a moment, at least, until it is
noticed that you are either no longer moving the leg clockwise or
not making the six. So what's going on (I think) is a conflict where two higherlevel control systems – the one trying to perceive the leg moving
clockwise and the one trying to perceive the finger drawing a six
– are using the same lower level direction of movement control
system to produce their desired perceptions: the leg rotation
system is trying to make the reference for direction of movement
“clockwise” and the finger drawing six system us trying to make
the reference for direction of movement “counter-clockwise”.
It's a nice analysis, but I think there might be a differentpossibility, or maybe both Rick’s and the following might work
together to create the problem. The other possibility is that the
confusion might be on the perceptual side. It would be interesting
to try this with subjects under hypnosis.The reason I make this suggestion goes back about thirty years, whenI had a summer student who was studying with a hypnosis researcher
for her graduate degree. I helped them analyze an experiment in
which the subject was exposed to two monaural streams separately or
together. The subject was asked to shadow (speak with no delay the
same words as) the stream in one ear, while pressing a button when
some prespecified item occurred in the other ear stream. When the
subject was unhypnotized, the two streams interfered. They didn’t
shadow as well when they had to detect the “cue item”, and they
didn’t detect the cue item as well if they were also asked to shadow
(d’ detectability theory measure). Under hypnosis, the mutual
interference went away, and the two streams were processed as though
by independent people rather than in the same brain.My impression of what was happening here is that it is very similarto what happens with skilled performers in sports or music.
Conscious perception ceased to be involved under hypnosis. When a
performer is learning the new skill, what happens in one place
sometimes confuses the conscious perception of what is going on,
but as skill develops, the different streams begin to be perceived
separately, like the lines in polyphonic music. The skilled
performer has reorganized the perceptual side so that instead of a
meld of sound (in music) what they hear is the separate lines, and
they can selectively attend to any of them (based on personal
experience and what others have said about their experience).If we accept that what is accessible to conscious perception is asubset of what is available for control, this would suggest that the
novice performer is much less able to control the individual lines
of music because the perceptions of the lines interfere with each
other. The skilled performer may have interference at the output
side (no pianist can stretch two octaves with each hand
simultaneously), but that is a different matter.In the case raised by Fred, which is akin to the classic "rub yourstomach while patting your head" challenge, there is no output
conflict between leg movements and hand movements. The conflict may
well be where Rick places it, but it could also at the same time be
a perceptual conflict in which an already organized perception such
as “clockwise rotation” has to be reorganized into two separate
perceptions that include place: “clockwise arm movement” and
“clockwise leg movement”.Martin
–
Richard S. Marken PhD
rsmarken@gmail.com
www.mindreadings.com
[Martin Taylor 2012.09.09.10.47]
Well, I guess Joggins Beach is nearly as far philosophically (full
of fossils) and geographically from La-La Land as you can get in
North America.
I used the hypnosis example as a case in which conscious perception,
requiring attention switching, interfered with performance, whereas
there was no interference under hypnosis. I guessed (and the fact
that it is guess is important) that the situation under hypnosis was
very like the situation in which a person has reorganized so as not
to need conscious perception when controlling two perceptions with a
common component, such as playing two against three with the two
hands on a piano. My vision of the necessary reorganization is that
it removes the common component and instead produces independent
perceptual functions that each contain a replica of what was
initially shared.
In PCT talk, the word “perception” is usually a shorthand for
“perceptual signal”. Most perceptual signals are not readily
available to consciousness, and of those that are we seem to be
aware of a very small proportion at any moment. However, it is
reasonable to suppose that any (everyday language) conscious
perceptions reflect perceptual signals. So, if you consciously
simultaneously consciously perceive two different things, it is a
reasonable bet that those two things also constitute independent
perceptual signals. By “independent perceptual signals” I mean
signals that are available for independent control.
On the other hand, if you have to switch attention in order to
consciously perceive two different things, it is not assured that
those things represent independent perceptual signals. Conciousness
is a notoriously difficult concept to pin down, since there is no
way to know whether any two people have comparable experience of it.
My own experience, supported by anecdotal evidence from many people,
is that if you have to be conscious of controlling a perception that
should be skilled, your control is likely to be worse, or at least
slower for the same accuracy, than if you simply “go with it”. Try
thinking about your golf swing as you do it. You are likely to get
quite fouled up, and the ball will not go how you want it to go
(although there may be a learnable skill in consciously observing
one’s swing or any other fast skilled performance).
Yes, I did not mean to criticise your explanation, so much as to
supplement it with another phenomenon that might also happen, either
alone or along with your effect. In some situations one might be
most important, while in other situations the other might dominate.
I’m not sure how one would test for which of these possibilities was
most important in any particular case. Your test doesn’t do it,
since if the direction of rotation is a shared component of two
controlled perceptions, the sharing induces no conflict when you
change the way you draw the six.
I’ll bet it is no harder than learning to play three against two on
the piano.
I got sick with a flu-like illness as we were leaving Alaska on
Canada Day for the cruise back to Vancouver. If I had been home, I
would have seen a doctor. When I got home I was told that I should
have seen a doctor because it could have been dangerous, but I
really didn’t want to get tied up in all the insurance paperwork
that seeing a doctor on a US ship would have entailed. It’s amazing
how much your medical system costs you per capita, given all the
impediments there must be for so many people to get service
conveniently (and I did recognize your smiley).
Martin
[From Rick Marken (2012.09.09.1110 ADT)]
Martin Taylor(2012.09.06.14.56) –
Hi Martin. Sorry it took a while for me to get back to you. Iwas finishing up the semester and now I’m off on a geological
tour of Nova Scotia with Linda. But I have some time before
going off to look at rocks.
I don't quite understand your explanation of the phenomenonFred posted. You say that the problem could be on the
“perceptual side” but I don’t really understand what you have
in mind. There doesn’t seem to be any problem perceiving
clockwise or counter clockwise movement of the arm and leg.
Are you thinking that this problem can be solved by
controlling a different, possibly higher level, perception?
Moreover, you seem to change from a perceptual to a
consciousness explanation when you see the interference in
Fred’s task as similar to what happens in a shadowing task. My
experience with shadowing is that the problem is one of
attention (which is probably equivalent to the conscious
observer in PCT) rather than perception; I can perceive both
the shadowed text and the key work to be detected just fine;
the problem is shifting attention from one to the other. Or do
you think the successful (hypnotized) shadower is perceiving
something different than an unhypnotized one?
What I like about my explanation is that it's simple, itcan be pretty easily modeled in terms of the PCT hierarchy (it
should be possible to build a working model of the phenomenon)
and it can be pretty easily tested (as in the test I did where
I simply change the way I was drawing the six so that both my
hand and leg motions were clockwise).
It would be interesting to see if one can eventually learn tomake simultaneous (and fluid) clockwise and counterclockwise
movements of the right leg and arm; it probably is. I’ll try
it if Iget another few hours of free time;-)
It's nice to be up here in Canada. But I brought my suicidepills in case I get sick, knowing how long the waits are for
your horrible universal healthcare system;-)
[From Rick Marken (2012.09.06.0900)]
Fred Nickols (2012.09.06.0725PDT)–
A friend sent me this littleexercise. I wonder how PCT accounts for it.
While sitting, raise your rightleg and rotate it in a clockwise direction. After
starting that movement, keep it going while you
use your right hand to draw the numeral six in
the air. Note what happens.
What’s going on?
Very interesting. My guess is that what is going on ishierarchical control. Apparently the system in our brains
that controls the perception of direction of movement is at
a higher level than the systems that produce the muscle
forces that move our limbs. So when you rotate the leg
clockwise you are controlling that perception (clockwise
motion) by varying the muscle forces appropriately to
produce that perception. Now when you try to draw a six with
your finger, if you start the six a the top tail you will
have to produce that perception by varying you arm muscle
forces so as to make a counter clockwise motion with your
finger.Apparently the direction of movement control system is nowbeing used by two still high level systems that want to
perceive two different directions of motion; the leg
rotation system wants to perceive clockwise movement and the
finger drawing a six system wants to perceive counter
clockwise movement. The result is a conflict which is
resolved by both finger and leg ending up moving in the same
direction – for a moment, at least, until it is noticed
that you are either no longer moving the leg clockwise or
not making the six. So what's going on (I think) is a conflict where twohigher level control systems – the one trying to perceive
the leg moving clockwise and the one trying to perceive the
finger drawing a six – are using the same lower level
direction of movement control system to produce their
desired perceptions: the leg rotation system is trying to
make the reference for direction of movement “clockwise” and
the finger drawing six system us trying to make the
reference for direction of movement “counter-clockwise”.
It's a nice analysis,but I think there might be a different possibility, or maybe
both Rick’s and the following might work together to create
the problem. The other possibility is that the confusion
might be on the perceptual side. It would be interesting to
try this with subjects under hypnosis.The reason I make this suggestion goes back about thirtyyears, when I had a summer student who was studying with a
hypnosis researcher for her graduate degree. I helped them
analyze an experiment in which the subject was exposed to
two monaural streams separately or together. The subject was
asked to shadow (speak with no delay the same words as) the
stream in one ear, while pressing a button when some
prespecified item occurred in the other ear stream. When the
subject was unhypnotized, the two streams interfered. They
didn’t shadow as well when they had to detect the “cue
item”, and they didn’t detect the cue item as well if they
were also asked to shadow (d’ detectability theory measure).
Under hypnosis, the mutual interference went away, and the
two streams were processed as though by independent people
rather than in the same brain.My impression of what was happening here is that it is verysimilar to what happens with skilled performers in sports or
music. Conscious perception ceased to be involved under
hypnosis. When a performer is learning the new skill, what
happens in one place sometimes confuses the conscious
perception of what is going on, but as skill develops, the
different streams begin to be perceived separately, like the
lines in polyphonic music. The skilled performer has
reorganized the perceptual side so that instead of a meld of
sound (in music) what they hear is the separate lines, and
they can selectively attend to any of them (based on
personal experience and what others have said about their
experience).If we accept that what is accessible to conscious perceptionis a subset of what is available for control, this would
suggest that the novice performer is much less able to
control the individual lines of music because the
perceptions of the lines interfere with each other. The
skilled performer may have interference at the output side
(no pianist can stretch two octaves with each hand
simultaneously), but that is a different matter.In the case raised by Fred, which is akin to the classic“rub your stomach while patting your head” challenge, there
is no output conflict between leg movements and hand
movements. The conflict may well be where Rick places it,
but it could also at the same time be a perceptual conflict
in which an already organized perception such as “clockwise
rotation” has to be reorganized into two separate
perceptions that include place: “clockwise arm movement” and
“clockwise leg movement”.Martin
-- Richard S. Marken PhD rsmarken@gmail.com [www.mindreadings.com](http://www.mindreadings.com)
From:
Fred Nickols
To: CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 6:43 PM
Subject: Re: An Unusual Phenomenon
[From Fred Nickols (2012.09.06.0940 PDT)]
Thanks, Rick. Nice analysis on your part. By the way, I have a colleague in the Human Performance business who focuses on error management. I seem to recall some of your work had a similar focus. Hes interested in PCT and I thought it might make sense to put the two of you in touch.
Fred Nickols
HB : It’s not bad example to explore how HPCT works. But can you say anything about example below ? i see it as good example how strategies of interpersonal control are used unlimited to reach any goal that human kind can think of or imagine.
Best,
Boris
----- Original Message -----