View Single Post
Old 04-25-2012 | 04:44 PM
  #96861  
scambo1's Avatar
scambo1
The Brown Dot +1
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,775
Likes: 0
From: 777B
Default

Originally Posted by Sink r8
That's what I said earlier about the sell job. I think they're too invested in it. It's like asking a proud father that just cut the cord to give an opposite viepoint, and tell them the kid's ugly. I understand the logic in wanting data in your own due diligence, but it would be some sort of shyzo leap for them to do one thing (produce an agreement they think is fair), and the opposite of that thing (argue it isn't fair). They'll do something like capncrunch suggested, instead.

I think the best we can acheive is to at least get them to leave us alone, as we make our own, private deliberations. As I said earlier, it comes to down to not losing track of your own criteria, your own benchmark, and judging the product.

In theory, it would be nice to have neutrals write credible point/counterpoints. In reality... if you're starved for debate at that point, there's always APC.

But then you are still left with topics like in our section 1 vs RAH. If you read the language, it surely sounds like we are protected...but...