Thank you for your explanatory response. Honestly, thank you.
It is exactly what I expected to originally see. Something as simple as (Cold Fusion) at the end of the title would have been a clue to whether I should link through.
As a busy person I am sure you understand not wanting to blindly follow links that often lead to other posts or blogs, further wasting time with no real meat. Not recognizing the name of the presenter right away nor understanding the topic didn’t help.
Many people fail to connect with others who are honestly interested in a subject because they don’t realize that their insider buzz words aren’t understood. Bringing that to your attention was my intent. CF just as easily could have been interpreted as carbon footprint, and CCF could have been cold cathode fluorescent for all I knew by reading the little bit originally posted.
Thanks again for your explanation and please be slightly more explanative of the topic when it is not generally understood so others can have the benefit of your insights and postings.
Heh....you got caught by the same mistake I recently got called for...if you'll look at the "Keywords" section of the original post, you'll see what you were originally looking for, I think.
I tend to skip over the "Keywords", too. But they are there for a reason. I always put them in when I am posting, but tend not to read them when I am "just reading". I'm trying to do better on that.