Shane, It seems there were many different ways in which to interpret your post. It looks like I picked an incorrect interpretation, based on the people to whom it was addressed and their participation in a thread which you started. Basically, you started the "heart healer" thread with a very precise facts from the Old Testament. Most, if not all, of the followups were much lighter hearted in nature, giving people's personal takes on things. It is this to which I thought you'd taken exception. I did quite a lot of back reading to try and ensure I hadn't read it all wrong... Unfortunately, I think the very oblique nature of the "apologia" post made it hard to interpret correctly, or more importantly, easier to interpret incorrectly. So: sorry. I can only plead that I was aided and abetted by a couple of beers and a short temper - the last message I'd read that "didn't mention names" was rather clearly directed at certain people, so I kinda had that buzzing in my head too. As for the Oxford thing... I'll try and explain myself. I don't know what it was like in England when you were at Oxford. But these days in the UK, making a point of saying that you studied at Cambridge or Oxford in the way you did doesn't add weight or credence to arguments, rather the opposite I'm afraid. There's nothing personal in that point: I live in Cambridge myself, and know some very wonderful people who have graduated from there, and a few from Oxford too. However, the modern "oh yah" element from these institutions has created an overall public perception that concentrates on the negatives (pretentiousness, daddy's money, may ball survivor photos and garden parties) not the positives (undeniable academic excellence, bloody hard work to get there, employability, and so on). Lastly, I'd just like to say one thing about the issue of messages being sent directly to someone in addition to the list. The default action of most mail packages when used in combination with the mailing list system (such as the Joni list uses), is to address "replies to all" to both the list *and* the original poster. If the message does go to the list *and* the poster, I suggest humbly that it should not be interpreted as being sent directly to the poster alone, rather being a side effect of the interaction with the mechanics of a mailing list such as this one. I myself forgot to think hard about this one. Regards, --Chris
