[ClearCase_guy]

Ann is factual, therefore Ann is responsible; if anyone can show me that Ann has not been factual, then I will concede that she has not been "responsible."

I can't tell if you read me the wrong way. Just on the chance that you did: I've read Ann's books. I've read her footnotes. I consider Ann to be very factual and very responsible. I also consider her interesting and fun to read.

I see a lot of Conservatives are also factual and responsible -- but not as interesting or fun. I was attempting to make a distinction based on the "fun" part of the equation, not the "factual" or "responsible" aspects.

Cheers.

[Map Kernow]

I can't tell if you read me the wrong way. Just on the chance that you did: I've read Ann's books. I've read her footnotes. I consider Ann to be very factual and very responsible. I also consider her interesting and fun to read.

Didn't mean to misread you. My point is, Ann's been attacked too much (not by you, but by plenty others) essentially for being a "liar." She is not a liar---her opponents are liars. I recognize that her writing and speaking style puts many people off. It turns me on. That's all.

Cheers.