Ed Weick wrote: > Yes, of course, Chris. One has to think of balance. And so it goes, on and > on and on.
My use of the term "balance" certainly did NOT refer to "an eye for an eye", as you insinuate here. On the contrary, as should be obvious, I referred to the balance of perspective(s) and facts as basis for decision-making, which is necessary to achieve fair and _peaceful_ solutions. No good solutions can come out of a distorted, unimpartial and/or misinformed basis for decision-making. Chris
