Ken Jensen

Not only that, but the programs "focus more on the quantitative aspects rather than the qualitative aspects of design," says Ken Jensen, a senior designer with Weber+Thompson in Seattle.

Kicking off the discussion, Ken Jensen, an architect with Weber and Thompson in Seattle, writes:
...
> You're welcome, Ken.

> Volker's arguments, as well as those below by fellow repeat correspondent Ken Jensen, are so well presented that they deserve a lengthier and more formal response than we usually provide to LaiserinLetters. Instead, we'll move our reply to this issue's Laiserin'sLemma™—Ad BIMinem Argument.

In IssueSixteen's LLLetters, Ken Jensen of Seattle also responded at length to our initial BIM argument in IssueFifteen. Ken's main point was that Architecture is a loftier pursuit than Building or Construction (A => B => C) and therefore deserved pride of place in his proposed label, "architectural information modeling" or AIM. In his current message, "AIM-ing for the Future," Ken reasserts his point of view:
...
> Well, thank you, Ken, for your extensive and thoughtful contributions to this forum.