Dear Christopher,

Please don't be chaste.  At least, please don't associate me with your 
chastening or chasteness.  (Assuming you unclean acts are confined to 
the signatories to your contract.)

I am not opposed to paying attention or listening.  Its part of being a 
good preservationeer to understand the culture and its influences on 
building.  But, there was something in the tone, a self-righteousness, 
that suggested that I needed to listen, and my views needed to be 
altered, and that I really had nothing to offer the folks who hold the 
majority view.  I found that offensive.

However, there is a view that seems to hold influence in high places 
that if one holds a majority by 1%, that is sufficient to do whatever 
the hell you want, whenever you want to whomever you want...or at least 
sufficient to change the terms of the contract.

Me, I'm just an old hippie.  Don't give a damn about majority views, 
let alone the views of people in authority.

-jc

On Dec 3, 2004, at 7:24 AM, Met History wrote:

> In a message dated 12/3/04 7:22:06 AM, 
> [log in to unmask] writes:
>
>
> <<<Who is this guy? And why am I supposed to give a rodent's posterior 
> about what he thinks would be a good new discourse?
>
>
>     Amen!>>
>
>  Ok, Ok, Ok, let's not pay attention to what 99.999% of America is 
> building - and likes.  Let's only pay attention to superexpensive 
> paint jobs to our historically correct wooden gutters, treated with 
> broiled linseed oil, preferably free-range.  Or should the linseed oil 
> be braised?   I can never remember. 
>
>  Chastened,  Christopher