<<OT: For You, Guardian...>>
Even given a generous interpretation of your proposed standards,
I'd have been bounced long ago.
BTW, I don't find much fault with what you're suggesting... though
it does sound a little like one of those village councils in the UK
where even a sneeze must be legislated. But, the gist of your
thinking is worth serious consideration.
With the exception of some of my off-topic meanderings on the
world of SI, etc, this THREAD used to be very much like the kind
of place I think you'd appreciate. As one poster has put it,
it was sleepy but cordial. We had folks who questioned SEEK's
management or despaired that SEEK would languish forever in
also-ran-ness. Then, for whatever reason (and I'm feigning
ignorance as to exactly why), it devolved VERY quickly...
into a diss-for-dat-fest. And it was for from cordial. Indeed,
it became almost unreadable. Nobody comes off looking ver good when
on the attack or on the defensive...
Anyway, I wish you well with your investments... and progress
with your ideas for standards. Best Regards,
c m |
