>>> Continued from previous message

KG>Further, I don't feel your comments about Jeff were appropriate.
KG>Jeff was not the subject of the posts.  I think he attempted
KG>to make some connection between the Deepwater Horizon and
KG>"The Lost Horizon."  I decided to explore the manner in which
KG>the author, James Hilton, framed the conclusion, challenging
KG>his use of "strong" and the meaning of "meek."

When I post a message on a bulletin board, I consider it as being
an occupational hazard.  Others are free to criticize anything and
everything I post, no matter how nicely or harshly they want.

Why should Jeff's opinions, or anybody elses, be exempt from
criticism?  Should everybody simply accept Jeff's view, as if it
was the gospel truth?  You already know what I think of as being
the gospel truth.  So you tell me.

KG>As has so often been the case in the past, the focus gets lost,
KG>especially when someone chooses to engage in a little buffoonery,
KG>filling the threads with a lot of foolish nonsense.  I can
KG>appreciate the humor, sometimes, and the light-hearted banter,
KG>but it does make a more serious conversation difficult.

Poking fun is a means of criticism.  It can be cutting, it can
be supportive.  It can be many things.  Consider it as being a form
of constructive criticism, and you might actually learn a thing or
two.

--Lee


 * SLMR 2.1a * We are confronted with insurmountable opportunities.

--- Maximus 3.01