This was tabled a long time ago. Leave the subject alone.
On Tue, 28 Oct 97 12:35:37 -0700 STUART_BRENNAN@HP-Andover-om3.om.hp.com
writes:
>Item Subject: cc:Mail Text
>
> I didn't have to read the messages, or even look at the subjects.
> It
> was obvious that TAC WARS II had started, just from the number of
>
> submissions over the last day or so. So I might as well throw in
>my
> two cents worth.
>
> I'm located a couple time zones east of the nearest TAC
>inspector, and
> while I would love to be able to pay a few bucks and gain access
>to
> the knowledge of what makes a Tiger a Tiger, we are forgetting
>one
> thing.
>
> Remember last spring when I suggested that none of this is rocket
>
> science, and that we could develop the same information base
> ourselves, if we just shared the bits of info we had? Do you
>know how
> many replies I got? ZERO!
>
> The TAC guys did the work, developed the data base, set up the
> program, trained the inspectors, etc. They did the work, and the
>rest
> of us didn't. By their efforts, they own it, and can do with it
>what
> they please. While some of us would like them to handle things
> differently, it's their product, so they can control access to it
>the
> way they choose. If you don't like it, then don't participate.
>
> And yes, there will be mistakes. The courts make mistakes, The
>IRS
> makes mistakes. Windows helps my computer make mistakes.
>Anything
> with humans involved will eventually have some mistakes. But,
>what's
> the alternative?
>
> I believe that if TAC fails a car, all they are saying is that
>the
> required clues are not present. Maybe it's a Tiger that's had so
>many
> parts replaced, so much rust repaired, that the clues are gone.
>Or
> maybe it's an Alger Either way, it may look neat and go like
>hell,
> but the Tiger clues are missing.
>
> We've all heard the story about Uncle Fred's axe. Had the same
>axe
> for 50 years. Yes he did. Of course, over the years it needed
>two
> new heads and six new handles..... Where do you draw the line?
>The
> TAC guys are trying to define what makes a Tiger real, and while
>we
> may not agree on their methods, I haven't seen anyone else try to
>do
> it better.
>
> Stu
>
>
>
>
>
>
|