Gary,
A brief time out and then I will come back and deal with your very substantive post. In the mean time a few observations and proposed rules of engagement.
1. Your continued disclaimers are not necessary with me. You are an attorney and as such govern your conduct by a code of ethics that must be applied even in your non-attorney endeavors. Therefore, as long as you don't accuse me of being a CYBER_MERCENARY I will not make similar assumptions or accusations against you. If in the natural course of you doing an excellent job of discussing issues, your efforts come to the attention of the management of CCC and they offer you employment, I believe your code of ethics will cause you to do one of two things. A. announce your affiliation and its possible effect on your objectivity, or: B. if your affiliation itself is confidential then I would expect that you would withdraw from the discussions here.
2. Item 1 gives rise to the observation that this company could possibly do no better than to actually announce and hire a person such as your self, exactly for the purpose of interacting with its
shareholders in a much needed effort to regain credibility.
3. If in fact I secure one of these lucrative CYBER_MERCENARY engagements or any affiliation or position in the market or any other circumstance that creates any ethical dilemma concerning my presence on this thread I will govern myself in accordance with 1.A and/or 1.B. above.
4. It is impossible in any exchange from time to time, to not be guilty of putting words in somebody else's mouth, that they did not really say. If and when that happens I will, and will expect you to likewise strenuously hit that point and object vehemently. No offense will be taken when that is justified nor should it cause you to be offended. I merely mentioned that because I think you did that a couple of places but I don't think it was intentional or "sinister".
5. "Sinister" brings to mind another point in passing. Misunderstandings happen. For example, when I first found your post I knew that I could not reply but was anxious to get the gist of what you had to say. In giving it the Evelyn Woods once over I came away with a misconception over your use of the word sinister. A later closer reading proved that the problem was mine not yours.
6. You are a trial lawyer and as such you know that arguments dropped are often arguments lost. However in a complex discussion of numerous items and dimensions things do get dropped. I will bring them to your attention if they seem important and as was the case of the BT financing issue I assume that if you don't abandon it you will come back on it with both barrels like you did. Give me the same pportunity and we will have fun.
5. I find your posts extremely interesting and worthy of discussion in depth, and by in depth I do not mean just between you and me. Serious input by others can do nothing but enhance the value of the discussion. On the other hand it adds geometrically to the chances for misunderstanding and low blows, intentional or otherwise. I just want you to know that in the unlikely potential that anyone is on thread that might ostensibly support me but who either unintentionally or otherwise delivers such a low blow that they will find me defending YOU. I suspect you might do the same.
6. One of the people who I know is usually here but usually silent, perhaps in part out of complete confusion over where I am coming from is Steve Bergman. I have been to his web site learned a great deal about him and the large area of common ground( which I know but he does not) that we share. Steve made a couple three very profound posts to me when I first came here and although I am sure he thinks I was oblivious to them, I was not, and have never forgotten them. However to have followed his sage advice would have made my work here impossible. I mention this as a very strong invitation to Steve to jump in here at a level that I believe will be more to his liking and will commend him to you as someone who will enhance your life's experience also Gary.
7. Because I can, I reserve the right to engage in extracurricular activities with the children from time to time. But Golly some times they drive me nuts. But kids and their childish antics add frivolity to life also. You see not only does that email address make you vulnerable, but it also greatly constrains you, at a very vibrant level of your personal being. I think you term these my "erratic" posts
I will get back to shooting your last excellent post out of the water soon. <|;q)
See I do have a life. |
