tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post353206863675823517..comments2024-03-19T00:19:09.117-07:00Comments on Rocketpunk Manifesto: High Kings and Galactic Emperors - Monarchy in Science Fiction and FantasyRickhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16932015378213238346noreply@blogger.comBlogger353125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-1989652868745567552023-11-28T23:34:35.727-08:002023-11-28T23:34:35.727-08:00Education and counseling are key components of mit...Education and counseling are key components of mitigating collateral consequences. A defense lawyer may collaborate with qualified professionals to ensure that the client receives appropriate therapy or counseling to address any underlying issues contributing to the alleged offense. This not only demonstrates a commitment to rehabilitation but can also be presented in court as a proactive step toward personal growth and accountability.<a href="https://srislawyer.com/online-solicitation-of-a-minor-defense-lawyer-virginia-fairfax/" rel="nofollow">Solicitation Of A Minor</a>Isabellazz1https://srislawyer.com/online-solicitation-of-a-minor-defense-lawyer-virginia-fairfax/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-14158295446828574742019-05-18T09:54:33.553-07:002019-05-18T09:54:33.553-07:00It’s amazing to visit again n again coming to your...It’s amazing to visit again n again coming to your blogs the superb effort is here. <a href="http://productsadvisors.com/amp-research-bedstep/" rel="nofollow">amp research bedstep</a><br />Nicolehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16101967980858643588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-60193457949862103952014-05-09T22:09:34.862-07:002014-05-09T22:09:34.862-07:00Yes, I'm afraid that's totally old hat, TD...Yes, I'm afraid that's totally old hat, TDA. SF authors like Pournelle have been saying that for decades. But while I suppose it's certainly a possible outcome, it's far from inevitable, or the only way of having a dispersed 'empire' under one government. Another way is *federalism* -- the early USA was far bigger than most feudal states (like France or the Holy Roman Empire), with no better communications apart from the printing press. And presumably space empires would have mass media and Internets, not just printing.<br /><br />Tangentially, Regine Pernoud argued that the 'kingship' of true feudalism -- first among peers, living off the revenues of his own land, needing approval for new taxes, and bound by many rights and customs -- is basically an entirely different office from the 'kingship' of putative absolute monarchism like the Sun King. We use the same word for both, and there's some historical continuity, but in essence there's vast difference.Damien Sullivanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13321329197063620556noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-52120031123453058202014-05-09T16:08:10.525-07:002014-05-09T16:08:10.525-07:00Possibly trying to revive a dead horse here, and p...Possibly trying to revive a dead horse here, and possibly restating something that has already been said in the 349 previous comments, but a feudal, if not completely monarchical, society actually makes sense in a non-space opera SF setting.<br /><br />I am not an expert on medieval history, but as I understand it the feudal system was a complex net of rights and obligations going up and down the social ladder. In a (probably grossly oversimplified) nutshell, you provided land to those below you, and loyalty, tax, and service to those above.<br /><br />The holdings of the nobles were, at least nominally, the property of the king, which he "allowed" the nobles to use. In exchange, the nobles would provide soldiers for the king's army in wartime and tax for the royal coffers. A similar procedure happened between the nobles and their knights and peasants, where both were provided with land (actual ownership for the knights, more of rented use for the peasants) in exchange for military service and tax income, respectively. This let the lower classes work the fields and make a pittance to feed their families while the nobles and kings enjoyed their power and wealth. And even though the king was nominally in charge of the entire country, the nobles' estates were passed down for so long the king would have been forced to pry them away by brute force, and rebellious nobles became a possibility. All of this with the disclaimer that I may be entirely wrong (I'm fairly sure I'm coloring European feudalism with its Japanese counterpart here too, though I'm not sure how much).<br /><br />That seems useful in a space setting, either interplanetary near-future or interstellar where FTL travel is long, dangerous, expensive, or otherwise difficult. You are a would be space hegemon and have a territory that you can't effectively control from your Grand Capital? Appoint someone who has sworn loyalty to you--be they a governor, a duke, or whatever--and let them run the show from on-site. You get someone who can keep the money flowing in and the pesky peasants in line (and who has a little battlefleet handy that you can use to get rid of the annoying rebels trying to depose you), and they get a lucrative cut of the tax revenue and protection from someone more powerful. Now you don't have to worry about every little happening. The Duke of Jupiter simply reports all is well, after he deals with that famine on Ganymede in whatever way he sees fit. Until, of course, they decide they could do even better on their own, or worse, aligned with your rivals...<br /><br />On second thought, the concept of satellite states might be more applicable. When Napoleon went on his little jaunt through Europe, for example, he didn't try to ostensibly add all of Europe to France. He re-drew the borders of the minor powers a bit and installed friendly governments, and kept the major powers--Austria, Prussia, and Russia--friendly by threats of another visit by the Grand Armee. These states were nominally under their own rulers, but they still obeyed France and even sent troops for her army. And there was no question of who was superior.<br /><br />Or, for another analogy more modern than feudalism, the British Empire during the 18th, 19th, and early 20th centuries. The government in London could not effectively run the day-to-day operations of its far-flung colonies, so the Royal governors had greater or lesser degrees of autonomy. Of course, if they screwed up too bad, they risked the Crown's displeasure and a quick visit from the Royal Navy.<br /><br />Transplant this system to space and let it develop over a century or two. It becomes easier to make the post of governor a lifetime one, and to pick a new governor from the planet's (or moon's, especially for near-future SF with no FTL) population, and if that happens to be the old governor's son, so be it. And just like that, you have a society that might not be ostensibly feudal, but that has all the trappings of kings and nobles nonetheless.<br /><br />--TDAAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-63320944063717456772013-11-24T14:41:16.531-08:002013-11-24T14:41:16.531-08:00Of course such a design would make the reator heav...Of course such a design would make the reator heavier, but it would allow liquid cooling of the windows and bimodal operation. Another possibility would be to use some type or cermet fuel to moderate the neutron flux sufficiently to keep the windows from melting, problem is operational temperature of the rocket exhaust would probably be lower so I imagine ISP and thrust would be relatively low. Using MITEE style design and light-weight composites for such a reactor might allow a decent thrust-to-weight though. If they could get dusty plasma reactors to work that might solve the problems associated, I imagine electromagnetic or magnetic constriction would make a "light bulb" style reactor too heavy for launch. Such a design could solve some of the issues regarding dusty plasma fission fragment rocket designs low ISP and throwing away of isotopic fuel for thrust in some deep space applications.Cordwainerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756588407144494507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-5608987048188592282013-08-26T01:47:51.984-07:002013-08-26T01:47:51.984-07:00They said you can convert a fantasy into science f...They said you can convert a fantasy into science fiction by converting swords into lasers, but the problem is that, after converting to sci-fi, your fantasy monarchy will become an evil dictatorship that violates human rights and possibly hires child soliders.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-19939840488343305662013-06-14T16:25:53.213-07:002013-06-14T16:25:53.213-07:00But 'king' isn't just "guy in cha...But 'king' isn't just "guy in charge", it's generally "guy substantially in charge for life" and defaults to "...with hereditary succession" unless someone calls out to elected kingship. Likewise 'Count' will be expected to be a hereditary nobility, not an appointed governor (even if that's kind of how they started). They're good terms to use if those are the sorts of things you need terms for; whether your starfaring post-industrial universal-literacy society should be having hereditary rulers and governors is another matter.Damien Sullivanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13321329197063620556noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-25366565207667364782013-06-12T16:21:48.241-07:002013-06-12T16:21:48.241-07:00Niven and Pournelle said w/r/t "The Empire of...Niven and Pournelle said w/r/t "The Empire of Man" that they used ancient monarchal terms simply because they were useful. If they hadn't used "Viceroy" and "Count" and "Dutchess" and whatnot, they've have had to invent new tersm for more-or-less the same jobs and social positions, which would be pointless *and* a distracting strain on the readers. I think that kind of explains monarchism in SF: it's not so much that authors support or oppose kingship, it's that *everyone knows what a king is.* President is somewhat harder to define, in that it means half a dozen things in half a dozen different situations and cultures (President of a country, president of a company, president of the senate, president of the synagogue, president as titurlar head of state with no real powers, president as a prime minister, etc) so if you're writing a story and you want to get across the idea of "The guy in charge" then kings are a go-to image.<br /><br />Also, SF that deals with politics is frequently along the lines of "This is how I'd run society if everyone stopped being an idiot and listened to me." There's "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress," and other examples of "Heinlein's Republic." In situations like that, where the idea is some experimental new form....nah, envermind. I'm not going anywhere with that idea. Thought I had something, but I don't. Kevin Longhttp://www.kevin-long.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-16347800914477766192013-05-24T20:59:35.713-07:002013-05-24T20:59:35.713-07:00To comment on Thucydides and Damien's post reg...To comment on Thucydides and Damien's post regarding a republic versus a democracy, I would like to defend my arguments on the grounds that I do tend to be a political optimist. My political optimism is largely grounded in the idea that human's tend to improve things over time and even though history may have gyre in and out or progress in stops and fits, generally speaking human institutions and our quality of life has improved over time. I am a pragmatist also so I realize that no system made by imperfect humans can be fool-proof or without corruption. Which is why I would rather regulate and harness the power of "crony capitalism" in a positive way . I tend to think Third Way type distributionism of wealth and limits on government interference in the public and private spheres would be a good first step. That along with a more equal playground for special interests rather than a wealth driven/maintained one, and a more pluralistic form of government could solve a lot of the problems we see today. That does not mean we have to give up much needed social programs we merely need to improve them and make them more sustainable in those cases where they can be made more sustainable. I don't believe keeping people fiscally solvent into their senescense or taking care of those that are not physically or mentally fit to be fully productive of take care of themselves is an unworthy pursuit or will bankrupt the economy, if anything it will make the economy more vibrant and lessen the debt on private citizens and businesses that would have to pick up the slack without those programs in place. Where many nation states can really improve is limiting welfare spending on people who are able bodied and capable of work, as well as getting those able bodied individuals work and the training to get or create a job rather than take the welfare dime. Cordwainerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756588407144494507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-14468229032653725662013-05-24T18:52:20.120-07:002013-05-24T18:52:20.120-07:00Also I'm only human Tony not a Vulcan so pleas...Also I'm only human Tony not a Vulcan so please don't say the ship won't fit. Humans tend to be prosaic not precise for a reason, because it's not what you say but how you say it. Something which does not translate well to written communication, hence the wordgasm.Cordwainerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756588407144494507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-22581103223963381232013-05-24T18:11:37.269-07:002013-05-24T18:11:37.269-07:00Tony, I get where your going with my wordgasms and...Tony, I get where your going with my wordgasms and I am the first to admit that I am lacking in social skills. Although I have always been told I have good communication skills and should become a teacher since I tend to break things down into simply understood analogies, even if they tend to be wordy sometimes. As for where you come from I should explain where I come from I was in the Military for 12 years working in the Signal Corps and am now in Information Systems. From my own experience software programs and technical manuals are some of the most poorly written and user unfriendly tripe that software designers can hardly be called the paragon of good communicators.<br /><br />As for infornifics post I do wonder how automation would play into such a "computers make us stupid future". If your robot requires a ton of code and a dedicated electrical engineer for every mission it is given then your yeoman class might be much larger and your peasant class smaller then in a medieval society. Also if space travel is expensive as it is likely to remain so then the majority of resources "out there" will no doubt fall under the control of the "resource-based nobles" who fund such ventures, reducing most people to "mandarins or reeves".<br />That beings said most resource based wealth is owned collectively in this day and age either directly by government or is heavily regulated by government and large shareholder trust-type corporations to limit the wealth and power of individuals. Just because you have money doesn't mean you can effectively lobby or participate in government and even if you can your power is limited by bureaucracy, laws and other special interest groups. Most of the time governments and large businesses don't know what their left hand from their right is doing.<br /><br />Cordwainerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756588407144494507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-9507844186571975712013-04-21T20:54:59.426-07:002013-04-21T20:54:59.426-07:00Since this comment thread still seems alive, I tho...Since this comment thread still seems alive, I thought I'd add some input. There was a good essay by Paul Krugman back in 1996 called "White Collars Turn Blue" which tried to predict what the economy would look like at the end of the 21st Century - http://mit.edu/krugman/www/BACKWRD2.html. While some bits are already dated it offers a possible base for monarchs in a rocketpunk type future. The basic assumptions were:<br /><br />1. The information revolution will eliminate most white collar jobs and in general drastically reduce the value of college education. At the same time manual dexterity is not easily duplicated - such jobs still remain.<br /><br />2. Therefore, the work of the future involves manual labor or people skills. Information type jobs - including science and scholarship - are held by relatively few people. <br /><br />3. The wealthiest people are distinguished by ownership of natural resources, not mastery of the most highly skilled jobs. <br /><br />OK, how does that apply to monarchy? Well, you're got an upper class that looks like it did for most of history - based on control of natural resources. You've possibly got a gentry of elite white collar workers who are in theory a meritocracy but in practice more like Mandarins - winners of a rigged competition. That gets you something looking like lords and their immediate servants. And then below you have the bulk of the population, possibly including a lot of talented and ambitious people with little chance to move up. That might in turn give you a push to move into space - you need humans for the hands on work, and you have able people looking for a chance to move up. And need for resources might give a reason to move into space. Toss in something like Tony's torchship engine that can push things but isn't good for practical energy generation and you might just get your retro future back.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-16649476454041081752013-04-18T17:00:38.448-07:002013-04-18T17:00:38.448-07:00You know, I've always been taught that democra...You know, I've always been taught that democracy and capitalism are different things; democracy being a political system and capitalism an economic one, with a republic being a way to organize your country into a nation. I'm not sure what forms of governments will evolve in the future, but they should be interesting, and probably strongly shaped by their unique circumstances.<br /><br />FerrellAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-42785457344300910452013-04-18T09:50:18.881-07:002013-04-18T09:50:18.881-07:00"crony capitalism... Since the "system&q..."crony capitalism... Since the "system" is largely rigged to discount your and my input"<br /><br />Hey, as conservatives and libertarians like to tell me, "we're a republic not a democracy".Damien Sullivanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13321329197063620556noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-2072765689122129082013-04-14T12:47:42.895-07:002013-04-14T12:47:42.895-07:00But then again a broad political base is not alway...<i>But then again a broad political base is not always necessary to craft good policy, if the policy is good enough on its own merits to gather wide support.</i><br /><br />But of course the true question is "gather the broad support of whom?"<br /><br />Our current political system of crony capitalism has the broad support of the rent seekers who profit from it, and very little from the people who pay (opinion polls indicate that politicians are pretty much at the bottom of the heap of people or trades that are trusted or respected).<br /><br />Since the "system" is largely rigged to discount your and my input (the City of Montreal recently awarded a municipal contract to a company widely accused of corruption despite an overwhelming referendum result against such an award by the taxpayers of the city; the referendum being non binding), there are various pressures building up and various responses by the taxpayers; most of which have <b>worse</b> long term consequences for the polity in question (tax avoidance, the growth of underground economies or the physical removal of taxpayers, business and investment capital as people "vote with their feet").Thucydideshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09828932214842106266noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-56473837850379517702013-04-11T16:40:37.905-07:002013-04-11T16:40:37.905-07:00Cord:
Let's see...
This blog is a special ca...Cord:<br /><br />Let's see...<br /><br />This blog is a special case, but when somebody gives people credit for knowing the basics, he's witholding? I think you need to rethink that a bit.<br /><br />Yet at the same time, your idea of being clear about a subject is to wordgasm at every opportunity. I think you need to rethink that too.<br /><br />Just so you get where I'm coming from, my day job is software design and development. Being concise and focused is my stock in trade. I have to tell you, I see no reason why people can't be the same in their evedryday dealings with each other. Why you <i>do</i> is an absolute puzzlement to me. The only excuse I can see is, as I have alluded earlier, that you just haven't been taught effective communication techniques. And that's not for me to adjust to. It's for you to improve.Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-55385723452839538812013-04-10T10:34:11.765-07:002013-04-10T10:34:11.765-07:00Personally I like a healthy debate and a blog is a...Personally I like a healthy debate and a blog is a good place for such things. On the other hand Tony if I were to encounter your method of argument in a political arena I would probably find you off-putting. Which could be a good thing if your interested in only dealing with those within your own political circle but might lead to difficulties when crafting policy with people that you don't necessarily meet eye to eye with. But then again a broad political base is not always necessary to craft good policy, if the policy is good enough on its own merits to gather wide support. Also it is sometimes possible to find a good front-man if your showmanship or social skills are lacking.Cordwainerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756588407144494507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-13781895064528366732013-04-10T10:05:36.296-07:002013-04-10T10:05:36.296-07:00To put simply while I agree I have a roundabout wa...To put simply while I agree I have a roundabout way to coming to the point and have a tendency to throw around broad labels and generalizations at times. I would put forth Tony that you need to be better at being a "social chameleon" and clarifying your positions better, unless you like your positions challenged as they have been in this blog. Talking to people at a high society gala is different then how you talk to your neighbors in your neigborhood. Discussions in a literary circle are different then discussions at a town hall. In plain language "Don't bring a knife to a gunfight".Cordwainerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756588407144494507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-42673439957052354532013-04-10T09:24:27.427-07:002013-04-10T09:24:27.427-07:00While you and I did not formally introduce those ...While you and I did not formally introduce those concepts into this blog other participants did, Tony. Why don't we keep the "importance" of these concepts within this blog which is a "special case". Also I already agreed with you on the fact that many of these concepts are not necessary or important to running a campaign or even necessary to good governance. Although in some cases some of the aforementioned ideas can be helpful tools for good governance or for galvanizing one's political base if you know how to inform those involved in a manner that is understandable. I'm not knocking the idea that one should stick to what is consequential and substantive when constructing policy or that one should communicate in a direct and easy to understand format. I'm merely making the point that this blog is a "special case" and others have already shown a propensity for flowery speech.<br /><br />Cordwainerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756588407144494507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-91921592142531971142013-04-09T23:23:53.716-07:002013-04-09T23:23:53.716-07:00Cord:
"Also, I'm not the one that introd...Cord:<br /><br /><i>"Also, I'm not the one that introduced Social Group Theory or Didactic computation and organization into the conversation."</i><br /><br />Actually, you did. Whatever you think I wrote that touched on those things, I certainly didn't do it consciously, because I've never heard of either. The one gets 6.6M hits on google, suggesting that it means basically what one wants it to mean. (A quick scan of the first couple of pages of results confirms this.) THe other gets precisely seven hits on google, suggesting that it's not important at all to know what it is.<br /><br />The second example shows that just becaue you've heard of something. That doesn't make it important. As I said earlier, as important as self-learning can be, a formal education still gives you one thing that autodidactism doesn't -- an understanding of the shape of knowledge.Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-15324399786167570802013-04-09T21:22:48.895-07:002013-04-09T21:22:48.895-07:00I sort of implied already that they wouldn't, ...I sort of implied already that they wouldn't, although I think a fair share of educated politicians might and the electorate is becoming far more educated about these things since the creation of the internet and search engines. Plus my Dad's generation back in the 60's and 70's were no political slouches. As I said this is a speculative blog about science fiction and it sort of suggests a certain amount of education and interest in this sort of thing. Also, I'm not the one that introduced Social Group Theory or Didactic computation and organization into the conversation.Cordwainerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756588407144494507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-39920628086301090322013-04-09T16:40:38.366-07:002013-04-09T16:40:38.366-07:00Cord:
I have to ask a few serious questions here:...Cord:<br /><br />I have to ask a few serious questions here:<br /><br />Do you honestly think that politicians in the real world (not political theorists, Cause Guy, or academic commentators on their work) actually know all the labels you throw around?<br /><br />Do you think the electorate would understand them if they did?Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-57359024286711845452013-04-09T10:27:19.731-07:002013-04-09T10:27:19.731-07:00Looking in retrospect, Tony I could have been more...Looking in retrospect, Tony I could have been more polite in asking you to explain your views properly. That being said you have often been the one to bait others into entering into the debate over your claims and opinions by not being more open or explanatory in your remarks. I apologize once again for any offensive remarks I may have made.Cordwainerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756588407144494507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-20372275294992936122013-04-09T10:03:12.581-07:002013-04-09T10:03:12.581-07:00This is a blog about future government, namely neo...This is a blog about future government, namely neo-monarchism not a public forum for political debate. I thought I had room to be imaginative and bellicose. Where is your sense of fun Tony? Besides I thought I came to the point quite along time ago. I was merely expounding on your nitpicks and Thucydide's remarks which at least make succinct points unlike either my ramblings or your illusive and inflammatory statements.<br /><br />It is only through my chiding that you seem to have actually come to anything like a point. Also determining what is reliable data in the social sciences and politics is difficult and takes an inter-disciplinary approach, making broad or generalized prescriptives is likely to lead to bad consequences. <br /><br /> So being able to explain your views in both a broad and generalized way via labels like political theory and in a more sincere and simple to understand way via political policy, "stump speeches" and interactive community forums is necessary. Of course not all things are equal or relevant politicians can be very successful using just "buzzwords" or plain language, while not revealing anything of real substance. Eventually though they have to educate themselves and get down to the work of turning out policies that have substance, which is why their policies often turn out different then what they originally campaigned or planned for.Cordwainerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756588407144494507noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7494544263897150929.post-27497372320615444922013-04-08T22:02:43.995-07:002013-04-08T22:02:43.995-07:00Cord:
"I'm sorry if all my arguments sou...Cord:<br /><br /><i>"I'm sorry if all my arguments sound circular, mundane, uninformed or illogical in some way to you Tony. I'm self-educated so my use of the English language is not always technically or grammatically correct but I think it is about as good as some of the journalists I have read who write opinion columns. Personally I find your comments often contradictory and way too simplistic incomplete and unimaginative in tone, not to say your boorish or lacking in descriptive powers."</i><br /><br />Let's understand a few things here. <br /><br />As a computer software professional, It would be the ultimate in hypocrisy to criticise your efforts to educate yourself. You have to be able to teach yourself one new technology, complete, every year on the average. And that's just to keep up. Getting ahead takes considerably more effort.<br /><br />Having said that, there is a signal value in formal education -- it teaches you how to discern between reliable and unreliable information. Autodidacts often don't know how to make that distinction. To them everything is equal, because they don't know what fits in an organized framework and what is outside of it.<br /><br />I think that is the big hole in a lot of what you expound here -- to you it is <i>all</i> equal, and <i>all</i> relevant. The wide net you cast to address any question is evidence of that. Your prose is unfocussed and impenetrable, simply because you don't understand how to come to the point and then hut up.<br /><br />Which, I think, is also why you claim -- if indeed you're not just being facetious and gratuitously insulting -- that my proe is incomplete and unimaginative. You've simply never been taught good communications skills. You think quantity is quality, and that covering every imaginable angle is a necessary thing. But it's not. Good communication is based on coming to the point, and not getting sidetracked. Quite honestly, the more words you put in a statement, the less seriously people take it.Tonynoreply@blogger.com