On Mon, 6 May 2002, Hugh Blair wrote: > > I reckon there are some blind declarations which we should > > outlaw simply because of the grief they cause. This, > > Ben, is one of them and you really ought not to risk it :-) Consider it retracted, then. Some twaddle about hobgoblins and consistency hops unbidden into my brain here, to my own disadvantage. *grin* > Such a list exists at: > http://discusspricing.com/mailman/listinfo/price_discusspricing.com Um, that would be a double-d'oh, then. I personally am waiting for outside commentary on the conclusions I achieved, even if it's critical - I'd be disappointed if after writing 2,000+ words about Development And How Much It Costs, the only word I get back is that I've rushed to judgement on a tangential point. <tip type="Netiquette aphorism" author="Ben Henick"> If someone questions your statements, you are being criticized; if someone questions your right to make those statements, you are being flamed. If you defend your statements, you are carrying on a discussion; if you attack your critics, you are flaming. If you make a strong statement on the basis of experience, that means something. But if other people have had different experiences, that means at least as much. </tip> -- Ben Henick Web Author At-Large Managing Editor http://www.io.com/persist1/ http://www.digital-web.com/ persist1 at io.com bmh at digital-web.com -- "Are you pondering what I'm pondering, Pinky?" "I think so, Brain, but... (snort) no, no, it's too stupid." "We will disguise ourselves as a cow." "Oh!" (giggles) "That was it exactly!"