Pointless discussion?

I hadn't been aware of this controversy until having my attention
drawn to it by Kerik's post, and then John's. I don't see Terry's
posts, and I suspect I'm a happier person for it. Having seen only
the snippets quoted in these two posts, I can only guess that his
criticisms have to do with the top-down discussion, since it's been
the most active thread of late.

I still don't understand why people insist on reading things that
annoy them, and then complaining about being annoyed, but I'll say
this about the top-down discussion: To my mind, this has been a very
intelligent and useful discussion; anyone who would say that this
didn't produce useful information or any real help to the community,
either hasn't been paying attention to the discussion, or hasn't seen
Marek's print this morning, or having seen it, doesn't understand
what it means. Six months from now everyone (or a lot of people
anyway) will be printing gum on transparencies, back-exposed, as a
direct result of this discussion, and of the tests that accompanied
it, and of Sandy's original challenge. So, I guess I don't quite
get what the problem is, why this discussion would be considered
pointless or useless by anyone. I do, however, think the sniping
from the sidelines *is* pointless, and harmful to the community.
Katharine

On Apr 13, 2006, at 10:30 AM, john@johnbrewerphotography.com wrote:

> TK:
>
> "People come to this list hoping for information and intelligent
> debate. When they find long drawn out accounts related to pointless
> tests, they leave. Do you consider that to be acceptable ?"
> People may leave the list after reading your patronising and
> pompous comments too Terry.
>
> Just my tuppence worth.
>
> John.
>
> www.johnbrewerphotography.com
>
> Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage. Anaïs Nin.
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Thu Apr 13 12:25:15 2006