In a message dated 9/9/07 8:51:20 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Let’s try this: the next time someone attacks the person rather than the points, let’s take a look at what he/she has done, see if we all agree that that’s what has happened, or whether it’s largely a matter of individual perspective, and see whether the alleged offender, if judged guilty, concurs with the group consensus and agrees to refrain from such behavior. Then I’ll mete out a sentence, or won’t, depending on the circumstances. Essentially, I’m suggesting trial by jury, for the very reasons that process was established – to protect against the potential biases of one individual’s perspective. I've got a better idea. Stick to the 35 post limit and disallow any so called *four letter words* or curse words. This will clean up the dialogue and allow everyone interested, to post their ideas and thoughts for all to see. ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
