Jeffrey D. Mathias (jeffrey.d.mathias@worldnet.att.net)
Mon, 04 Oct 1999 16:03:04 -0400
Judy Seigel wrote:
> ...
> But, perhaps, unintentially, Jeffry seems to suggest that taking *money*
> in return for a publication is somehow venal.
This statement is totally inaccurate. Please point out to me where I
have allegedly suggested this. A statement like this is beyond a far
stretch of the imagination from saying that I have volunteered my time
by not requiring any reimbursement.
> I could rather point out:
> you get what you pay for, willingness to pay for something shows you value
> it, sticking with what's free is no bargain in the long run -- and all
> sorts of generalisations, true or not, or true sometimes, usually, or
> hardly ever. I'll add also that in my experience, there are likely to
> be fewer *strings* on the money.
Generalizations is right. How can one argue with generalizations.
Let's talk specifics. I'm not trying to "sell" (or pass off for free)
any "bargains". If one is going to learn the Pt/Pd process, they are
going to have to commit a lot of dedication and "hard" work (Yea, like
the good old fashioned kind). Nothing is free. There are no shortcuts
in Pt/Pd printing. It might be better said that one gets what they work
for. If anyone thinks that they can buy experience, or master the
process by throwing money at it, think again. With all the hard work to
master such a process, it's only fair that there is no charge for the
information.
>
> What is undeniable, however, is that living media do not all have the same
> virtues or functions -- nor do people..
>
Another good generalization. Let's concentrate on some living media
possessing high credibility and credential. This is not that difficult.
-- Jeffrey D. Mathias http://home.att.net/~jeffrey.d.mathias/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Fri Nov 05 1999 - 21:26:27