I have no interest or incentive to directly respond to criticism on this board. I think the emotionalism and lack of creative content speaks for itself.

As far as I am concerned, visitors to this site may read what the anonymous name-callers write, and they may read what I write. They can consider the track records of the name-callers, and they can consider mine. Readers are, I am sure, well aware that a number of contributors here are quite willing to misrepresent the content of conversations and statements in order to support their positions. I will leave it up to the readers to decide.

What I will say again is that ALPA is a complete strategic failure and has been unable to get out in front of virtually any important issue, including Age 60. Everyone knows it. Ours has become a dog-eat-dog, every-man-for-himself profession that is exemplfied by by a good number of comments on this site. In my opinion, ALPA would do well to learn from the past and quit repeating the same old mistakes.

I suggest that a few of you get together on a conference call with John Prater (tell him I suggested it), discuss the historic lessons you have not learned, and ask him how he feels about my article and the "irresolvable dilemmas" that we have created for ourselves.

Press on. I and, perhaps, a few other readers await your report.

Bob

P.S. Name-callers: I am pretty good at "marketing." If you would like a lesson in stirring things up in order to bring attention to your cause and get things done, let me know. In the meantime, thank you for being so easy to "stir up." On a matter such as Age 60, all publicity is good publicity, and you have made the publicist's job much easier.