Soundboard

[JIMRPT@AOL.COM]

Et Al;
 I posted this earlier in the day and several things have led me to believe 
that the wording I used was, charitably, poor, i.e.:

"Ron doesn't "argue" Him discusses alternative views leading to subjective 
conclusions based on internal processing of offered opinion and inflowing 
facts, fiction and on the odd occasion fantasy!! :-)
Jim Bryant (FL)"

  Now while this says 'exactly' what I meant to say it does not convey the 
'meaning' I meant to convey.  By saying "Him discusses".............etc. I 
meant to convey the thought that Ron discusses 'others' opinions, inflowing 
facts, fiction, and occasional fantasies and NOT that Rons answers drawn from 
his discussion were any of the aforementioned....quite the contrary I 
'always' place great store in what Ron has to say....I was thinking about 
this while helping a friend move this afternoon and after getting back here I 
found that some others agreed that I might not have left the correct 
impression :-(

 I agree that far too much 'fact' is engraved in stone when the only thing 
factual about those 'facts' is the engraving itself. If I have added, in any 
manner, to any such false 'factual' engraving I should be totally ignored. 
Now as somone has already said "back to your regular programming".
Contritely;
Jim Bryant (FL)