<P>> While the Crown is considering this, they have a couple of Pelicans<BR>> say "check out what he just posted on the Aerie". They do so, and<BR>> find that Melvin has just nailed someone hide to the door, in a very<BR>> blunt manner.</P>
<P>1) Doing this is an exclusionary tactic and will only be used as an<BR> excuse to not to give somebody an award. By the vary nature of<BR> online communication it is typically blunt, poorly written and<BR> even the most well intentioned comment can sound negative.</P>
<P>2) This standard isn't going to be universally applied. Somebody<BR> ripping on a popular peer might won't be held in the same light<BR> as say somebody ripping on me. Is there a difference? No! So<BR> why would anybody even suggest a standard that isn't going to<BR> be fair and honorable to all regardless of rank.</P>
<P>3) It's not what is said publically what you need to worry about<BR> but what is said privately. Politicans will kiss babies and tell<BR> you what they think you want to hear while stealing your lollipop.<BR> Just because somebody is saying something publically doesn't mean<BR> others aren't saying far worse privately.</P>
<P>Michael</P><p><hr SIZE=1>
Do you Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://shopping.yahoo.com/?__yltc=s%3A150000443%2Cd%3A22708228%2Cslk%3Atext%2Csec%3Amail">The New Yahoo! Shopping</a> - with improved product search