Fred Bauder wrote:
Yes, I see a lot of arbitrary nonsense. Either
version is quite acceptable.
I'm with Fred here. I just don't get what the point of this is. I've
tried reviewing the history pages (several times over the past few
months), looking for a "knock down" argument that one version is, uhm,
I don't know, factually incorrect, or scientifically incoherent, or
politically charged, or anything.
What I see is that some people prefer one, and some prefer the other,
and that neither side seems willing to just let it go.
My suspicion is that this page has turned into a proxy-fight about
other, deeper, more personal beefs. There are points of pride
involved?
Or maybe I'm just missing the point.
--Jimbo
both versions are factually correct, coherent, and not politically
charged. You are not missing the point.