Tom,
You describe my motives well. I haven't the time to edit, reconsider, etc.,
so what goes out is pretty much stream of consciousness. I do this mostly
for my own amusement and for what others bring to the party in terms of
information. It's also obvious that I like to thrust and parry with the
rest of you. Hopefully, this not only sharpens us mentally, but also leads
to some tangible benefits with respect to our automotive pursuits. I do
think it's a shame that a few out there are using this forum to be pointedly
abusive. I guess we all have our standards as to what's acceptable and
what's not and, if nexessary, we can always check out any time. This isn't
Hotel California. Hope you hang in there
Bob
>
> I think Bob was only attempting to add a little color to what many
>on this list may feel is a boring technical discussion. Each of us tries
>to develop a little style and its difficult to have someone critique our
>response to assure that someone can't be somehow offended.
>
> You jumped on my case a few of months ago for using religious
>arguments in defense of the STOA TAC Program. Truth is, I am an Atheist.
>I used that line of reasoning only because I thought it was the best way
>to make my points understood. I am certainly zealous, maybe even over
>zealous, about the TAC program and my self appointed responsibility as a
>defender of this Marque that Ian was responsible for. Ian was a long time
>friend of mine and that relationship colors my perspectives even more
>strongly today.
>
> I would like to propose some reasonable allowances for color and
>style before offense is taken. I'm sure that some of the spelling and
>punctuation errors on some submissions are not held in the highest regard
>by some recipients. Cut some slack.
>
>Tom Hall
>
>
>
|