Dan, welcome back.
I feel that I have to clarify one point. When I requested that we refrain from using the "p" word, I was referring to "paradigm."
All of my previous posts on this matter were contingent on the meaning of the word "ascendant." It was my earlier opinion that it was used to connote a much higher level of excellence, significance, and influence than it's now proven to be in my eyes, and indeed, in practice.
Here's why I say this:
If a perfectly good company can be held up as ascendant in one month, and then get defrocked, as it were, in the next month just because of a claim made by a second company that they can do it better --in the future, by yet unproven means, no less-- then the shelf life and the attributes of excellence/significance/influence of ascendancy, itself... becomes highly suspect, IMO.
If I'd known earlier about this ability to defrock the former ascendants at will, then I wouldn't have wasted yours, and everyone else's, time on the matter.
Thank you for a well thought out reply. I think that some others here may have some things to add, as well.
FAC |
