> The statement about herding is as controversial as writing that the sun > rises in the east and sets in the west. Everybody does it. It is a good > business practice. Why do you insist that it has to be hush hush?
And why do you insist that I've said things that I never said? I don't, and have not, said that it has to be hush-hush. What I have said is simply that this kind of language is not used in an unbiased review. An objective reviewer would NEVER say, "Microsoft has to herd more PC users into the latest version of Windows." He would instead say, "Microsoft clearly has a need to convert more PC users to the latest version of Windows" or something like that. And, once again, this is OK. He doesn't have to be objective. The reader just has to be clever enough to discern the ax he's grinding from the language he's using. > Claiming that a review is biased because it is not uniformly > positive is suspicious. Anyone who made even a token attempt to understand what I wrote will know that this is not even close to anything I said. > So what you object to is thinking and analysis? FOR THE LAST TIME, I object to NOTHING in the article. I object to your characterization of it as an objective review. ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
