--- In [email protected], "Rory Goff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Anyhow, as I said, I was thinking about you, and seeing you as a > kind of Jedi-Judy, weilding such a perfect, laser-sharp light-sword > of discrimination and chopping everyone's head off, or rather simply > holding the sword out and watching them run right into it :-)
In a similar vein, though I am perhaps not as emphatic and colorful as Rory, I like Judy's focus, insight and logic in many of her posts. It is interesting to see her view and process unfold when she takes on a topic. That is not to say that I always agree with her conclusions. I may evaluate and weigh the supporting arguments differently than her -- or have additional points I might consider. And some topics I am not intereted in (her past issues with turq). While Rory and I apparently are in a minority, I think she regularly makes a strong contribution and and often provides excellent examples of precise thinking and exposition. I also regularly enjoy Curtis and Marek's post for similiar reasons. For me the value in a post is not does it support your existing POV's, but rather, does it help you see things from a new angle. Does the "piercing look" of the writer help uncover new things, or reveal processes to do such. I find all three posters do that for me -- yet clearly their conculsions differ.
