"Leo" wrote in message
...
Jim,

For some reason, this discussion keeps going off on a tangent from the
core "issue" that began our discourse. Perhaps I haven't stated it
clearly enough, or during the discussion the original issue has become
clouded.

I have responded to your comments below, but I fear that we will
continue forever if we are not discussing exactly the same issue.

I understand that, due to your standards, you find Kim's callsign
inappropriate. No issue there - that is entirely your right. I also
understand that you do not wish to use it in any of your posts.
Again, no issue there - I respect that.

For clarity, I'll restate it in clear and concise wording:

Kim feels that eliminating just her callsign from your post was
unfair, as it singled her out. I agree. Would finding a compromise
whereby neither your standards nor Kim's feelings - such as removing
all of the callsigns and listing only names for all participants -
have not been a fairer way to handle this situation for all concerned?


It's much easier for the entire issue, to do what I have done. I requested
that Jim refrain from having my name in the list. Jim has said he'll do
that.

The unfortunate thing is that I suppose I'll have to quit responding to his
posts also, if I am to uphold to my *own* set of standards--because I think
it is totally wrong for him to remove my callsign from an original post of
mine. It is most unfortunate that his ambition to be "correct" is stronger
than his ambition to dialogue.


That's the only issue that I am discussing, Jim. Your rights and
standards are not at question here.

73, Leo


Kim W5TIT