CFC, Format Changes, And A Few New Rules
June 26, 2010
Folks:
I have some good news. First my response to Robert is done except for final editing and citing checks. It should be posted no later than Saturday and sooner if I can. Once again, I want to apologize for my delay. There were several causes for it. First I had some health issues which caused me a weeks stay in the hospital. There was a good deal of research I did. My research filled a 57 page document with each page being 81/2 by 11. I also read a 200 plus page book on a related issue. Finally, there was a technical problem. While doing the research, the laptop got a virus. When our virus software could not clean it, it became necessary to restore the laptop to its factory settings. This removed a good deal of installed software which had to be reinstalled. Unfortunately, one of the programs wiped out was my Microsoft Office. I have misplaced the install disks to it and therefore, I needed to compose my response on the desktop due to the editing features in Word. I ask you to forgive the delay and thank you for bearing with me throughout these trials and tribulations.
The second thing I need to explain is I needed to come up with a format to do two things. The first was to make it easier to read my response. To do this, I kept Robert’s response in a regular typeset when I quoted his response. My Response is in bold. The next problem was to keep the discussion moving and not get bogged down with replies to replies. Therefore, I have decided to put into place the following discussion format. I will post my summary of CFC as a thread post. I will then accept responses as comments. Based on the number of comments, I will select one or more comments and post them in the thread. I will respond to them. After I respond, that will end that thread and I will go on to a new one. Most likely after CFC is done, I will have a general discussion about the book.
Lastly, when I started this blog, I really had only two rules. The first was to be polite. The second was no ad hominem responses. After reviewing the discussions thus far, I think it is necessary to add a couple more. The first one of these is there will be no more bias or agenda arguments accepted. To make sure this is understood please do not asset a person is not to be believed or is somehow not trustworthy because he has some kind of bias or is promoting an agenda because he or she is affiliated with a particular group. Every one is biased and has an agenda and every one belongs to some kind of group. Please do not put these into your responses because if I select them to respond to I will edit out these arguments as they are a form of ad hominem. The last rule is please do not bring up the same arguments over and over. Pleas note these will also be removed if your comment is selected to post.
Finally while still wishing to encourage an open and free dialogue, if anyone ignores these rules, they run the risk of having their comments rejected.
Thanks in advance,
Ron
