[references!] Why Not debate "network externality"-path dependence?

[Seth Finkelstein]

	It's already been much-debated. It's just hard to find the
debate among the quasi-spam of the cult proselytizing:

[EH == Economic History]

EH.Res: FORUM: Path-dependence
http://www.eh.net/lists/eh.res/forum3/
http://www.eh.net/lists/eh.res/forum3/nov/index.html

EH.Res: Forum: More on QWERTY
http://www.eh.net/lists/eh.res/forum6/index.shtml
http://www.eh.net/lists/eh.res/forum6/mar/index.html
http://www.eh.net/lists/eh.res/forum6/aug/index.html

See particularly an article by one author debunking some L-M "debunking"

"I have considerable sympathy with the criticism by L&M that some of the
arguments for path dependency have been based "on poorly documented
evidence that dissolves upon closer inspection." But their account in
JLEO of this particular history is subject to the same critique."

http://www.eh.net/lists/eh.res/forum3/nov/0049.html
[Richard S. Rosenbloom, Harvard Business School, for credentials]

Also:
"Path dependence and the quest for historical economics:
one more chorus of the ballad of QWERTY by Paul A. David"
http://www.eh.net/Publications/pathdepend.shtml

"At last, a remedy for chronic QWERTY-skepticism! by Paul A. David"
http://www.eh.net/Publications/remedy.shtml

__
Seth Finkelstein  Consulting Programmer  sethf at sethf.com  http://sethf.com
Latest essay: What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org)
http://www.spectacle.org/0201/sethf.html