Troy, Ooops. I should have sent him my notice with the URLs and subheads for both articles, but after seeing his reply, I assumed he had received that. My fault. Well, when I posted yesterday's first instalment of "A reply to Michael Albert", I simultaneously forwarded a copy to him (and another to Robin Hahnel). That also has, at the end, URLs for both articles.
But I would note that he also ignored a lot of the material in the article on parecon structure that he did examine, and then complained that the conclusions came out of nowhere. He seems to have been in a hurry. Joseph Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: troy cochrane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [PEN-L] A reply to Michael Albert To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Joseph, let me say that the reason Michael wouldn't have responded to your overall > assessment is because I simply forwarded him the URL in your original post and that > URL led to the critique of the structure of parecon. > > Thanks, > Troy >