I acknowledge that I was being adventuresome with specific reference to awk, and perhaps in a way that falls outside the rules of this board in the specific assignments I was making (although personally, I was going with dim as opposed to corrupt) and was undoubtably using this board as a clearing house for notions that I find few if any other venues for ... so to be more clear:
in response to:
#msg-728760
and this:
#msg-728776
I offer that, perhaps fear as awk says, OR perhaps management and the BoD doesn't give a flying monkey and is perfectly pleased with throwing round one of the shareholders under the bus as they, of course, are not a member of that set. I expect them to take a share in round 2.
Given that I find that to be visible proof-in-evidence, those that say otherwise may well be considered shills or dim.
I overplayed shill, underplayed dim.
An important basis to me of either point is the significant influential rallying to keep the status quo as championed by awk and his lapdog (deliberate or not), Snackman.
If you don't like debt and you voted for Bush I'm going to have some words.
| 