FOM: proof theory (correction); call for discussion

[Stephen G Simpson]

In my posting of a few minutes ago I wrote:

 > Would some of the other proof-theorists on the FOM list (Tait,
 > Rathjen, Friedman, Pohlers, Takeuti, Sommer, Sieg, Buss,
 > Kohlenbach, Pfeiffer, Fine, ...) care to commment on this matter?

It was foolish of me to attempt to list the proof theorists who
subscribe to FOM off the top of my head.  I unintentionally omitted
two of the most prominent ones, Charles Parsons and Peter Aczel, and
perhaps others.  I apologize to anyone who was left out.

In any case, the purpose of my postings was to advance a discussion of
foundational issues and programs in proof theory.  Could some of you
proof-theorists please jump in?  You need to get involved in this
discussion!  I need your help!  I'm unqualified, because I'm not even
a real honest-to-God proof-theorist.

-- Steve