 |
 |
I agree with the reply at the bottom. I think if we start establishing this guideline and that guideline we all stand to lose at some point. Our system is imperfect but it's the best one going from the standpoint of it being the 'better for the whole'. You never know when you might find that 'pearl' amongst all the clams :) Respectfully, Lisa Carper >In a message dated 95-11-13 15:01:49 EST, you write: > >>This is not to say that others out there don't have something >>to add, but rather several of us have taken a pro-active >>stance on this issue, and are simply trying to keep the size >>of the "working group" at an efficient level [however - >>comments, input, etc. are always welcomed and >>encouraged, either as personal posts or global ones]. The >>point to be made is that until definitive answers to the >>question[s] have been obtained, global broadcast of >>intermediate messages is not warranted in my opinion. > >Then again, if the "working group" keeps all correspondence private until >definitive answers have been obtained it's going to be a bit difficult for >anyone else to comment, isn't it? Personally, I prefer to watch y'all >struggle toward an answer--it makes me feel a part of the process, even >though I am not contributing to the discussion. > >my $.02. > >manderwiz, also known as joyce and/or jessie > > --