I like Tom's way of stepping back and trying to get a glimpse of the whole picture . . . --------- >From: Tom - iantdhq@ix*.ne*.co* (IANTD ) >. . . And >how many of us know the amount of lobbying by both groups to government >agencies that goes on and the quality of it from an ethical point. I >suggest each participant be respected for what they are and what they >have provided to the community. This is true of Wes, George, Stone , >King, members of WKPP and members of the other group. But I think this post takes the cake and really puts this issue into perspective. ---------- >From: "david (d.p.) pearson" <dpearson >I believe both groups should be judged purely on their performance. >WKPP has a proven record. If a competing group has the credentials and >believes they can achieve greater results, they should be given the >opportunity to demonstrate. If their techniques are flawed, they will >not succeed. To grant exclusive access to any group conflicts with >public interests. > >Isn't it interesting that this discussion is even going on. This might >be the incentive required to add some humility to the WKPP gang. This >situation does not exist because WKPP are bad divers. It exists because >they are bad politicians. NEWD
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]