[spinestein]

"She delivered the piece under a contract wherein the work cannot be altered without the artist's permission."


That may be true, and she may not be LEGALLY obligated to fix it but my point is not about legal obligations, it is about providing "quality product...for money received" as I said. I, myself, have a business in the music industry where I provide a finished product to customers (this is also in the art field) and I would never shortchange my customers by giving them something that any reasonable person would be unhappy with, even though I could legally get away with it. To do such a thing is unethical.

Also, you allege that anyone who criticizes her spelling mistakes is part of the "grammar police" and would vote for John Kerry. This is simply a fallacious argument of distraction and has nothing to do with the logical argument.

[orangelobster]

"Also, you allege that anyone who criticizes her spelling mistakes is part of the "grammar police" and would vote for John Kerry. This is simply a fallacious argument of distraction and has nothing to do with the logical argument."

No, I think the analogy is solid. Just because you disagree with it doesn't make it fallacious.

This woman fulfilled her contract, the deal is done. At this point I think she should give the city council the same treatment that Cheney gave Pat Leahy on the senate floor.