We are reaching the point of diminishing returns in the TA conversation. I am finding new points that I like in the TA and I've found a couple of new ones I don't. I'm still going back over sections. I did the health care changes the past three days.

I'm sending about 15 questions to the Q&A that I think need clarified. No, they aren't negative questions, I simply need more info or "how does this work" type of question.

I do believe we should vote no and take whatever comes as that path is less fraught with risk IMHO than locking in some bad language in QOL. I would consider voting in favor if I received sufficient compensation for giving up QOL items. I don't think we're even close to my personal acceptable level. Of course, that's why we all vote as we each have a personal opinions on what matters. I do think the downside needs to be clear to people so they vote with due consideration. The nature of the process is that the union produced information will be geared towards the positives. We have to have succinct, accurate information to put out to those who will never read the TA or Q&A.

The thing that has spun me up this morning is the block 1 post. That's why my posts in some threads have been a bit grumpy today. The only thing I have been mad about so far is the lack of access the block 1 rep has had. It might have something to do with the NDAs many people had to sign. The NDAs poison the process. I'm sure much of what SL and the NC have been saying come from information protected under NDA. But, then I have no way of intelligently assessing their positions because of that stricture. I hope the block 1 rep can receive satisfactory information that he needs to present his argument.