On Mon, 11 Apr 2011 21:50:14 +0200, "Antonio Vernucci"
wrote:

Why not give us your opinion first? (It might help us who don't have
access to the article to know what the opion is for.)

I was hoping to find someome having thoroughly read the article and ready to
discuss his doubts.

Hi Tony,

To answer my question, it is not all that very difficult to give us
some "opinion-based" appraisal, the article was:
1. not particularly distinguished;
2. remarkably good;
3. remarkably bad.

However, if 2 or 3 is offered in response, then there is something to
remark. If it is remarkable, then there is some technical aspect to
discuss (which means we depart from opinion, unfortunately, for the
discussion to become rational).

I see no one offering a technically specific comment nor a general
opinion. By this benchmark, then, this article must not be
particularly distinguished or it is buried in an undistinguished
publication.

However, given Brett's link I would find nothing at that link to
debate either. On the positive side, that writing seems to rise above
undistinguished work, but if you are not going to commit yourself, or
provide deeper insight, then my observation is strained to give it
that much benefit.

Discussing the issues, starting from scratch, would lead to too long a debate.

The dynamics of discussion here are self regulating. It would seem
the "debate," after six posting has yet to begin (and we are thus in a
long discussion about the shape of the debate table).

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC