Ken Arromdee wrote:
On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
[Ken had written:]
It does NOT have to be negative in order for it to be removed.
"Contentious" Like "consensus", "contentious" is not defined by a single editor objecting.
So you're seriously suggesting that the line about him being a director should *not* have been removed, even though there was no source for it and he sincerely objected to it?
One of the meta-messages of this thread is that we ought not to extremify everything, ought not to constantly apply rigid one-size-fits-all cookie-cutter thinking.
Will is seriously suggesting that the line did not have to be removed immediately.