SA, Spot on I think. That's why a balance between the two is good. But then what is the right balance? I think one that is good is the right balance. :-)
Cheers, David. On 22/05/2007, at 7:56 AM, Heather Perella wrote: > >> [David] >> Quality can be both defined and not defined and the >> MOQ defends both >> positions. > >> [Ron] >> Just had to post this by itself > > > And this is why on some of my recent posts, I > think to Platt, I said how this has to do with the > question mark (?). You can focus on answering the > question, but doing that too much has one forget that > it is still an ever-lasting question. To focus too > much on the question mark, and not try to define is to > collapse all levels and then what - chaos. Tricky... > > woods, > SA > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > ______________Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship > answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. > http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545433 > moq_discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ moq_discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
