Geoffrey Plourde wrote:
You are beating on a dead horse. Mr. Vibber has
brought forth a list of perfectly valid reasons why this space was taken. LET ME REITERATE
THE COST OF REWIRING/RECONFIGURING SPACE IN CALIFORNIA. Why should a taco stand use a dry
cleaning shop when it can get another taco shop?
What would people say if Coke and Pepsi had an agreement to share
bottling plants? That might make perfect business sense, but rumours of
a merger would be rampant. The food court area of a shopping mall would
not have two taco stands because each would see the other as unfair
competition. Given the kinds of chemicals used in dry cleaning, I'm
sure that health authorities would have some say if someone tried to mix
those two kinds of establishments.
Conflict of interest and the appearance of conflict of interest are very
different beasts. The former is easily overcome by objective criteria
and standards, as has been done in the present case. The latter is what
sets tongues to wagging, most often the tongues of the usual suspects.
Those of us who have a passing familiarity with the persons involved
soon recognize when Chicken Little is crying "wolf" again. Once the
alarm is raised merely being alone in the same room with the door closed
is enough to condemn Bill and Monica; all the protestations of innocence
will not overcome the closed door.
When the alarm is raised by the usual suspects there are as many
opposing suspects prone to unflattering comments about those who raised
the alarm. The danger is that when there is a real beast at the door it
will be too late when it is finally seen for what it is. That's what
makes appearances so insidious.