>
> <<Steve, curing any of the serious maladies you mentioned is a
> constructive endeavor.  You are confusing the issue of changing something
> for no other reason than to create confusion versus changing something
> because it needs to change.>>
>
>
> Obviously, I don't agree. As I mentioned, my concern is in having someone
> declare a discussion "pointless" on the grounds that "we've always (or,
> in this case, for a significantly shorter period of time) done it that
> way". Such an argument is, in my mind, always defective. Which is
> completely different from considering such longevity, and the reasons for
> it, as part of the discussion.
>
> A constructive examination of alternatives is seldom inappropriate, even
> when, as in this case, the outcome is virtually guaranteed to be "leave
> things the way they are". But I think it is important that such decisions
> be arrived at *after* an informed examination of the alternatives.

It is intuitively obvious that to change something like the first day of
the week is a folly.  Needs no discussion.

Nick Demos  [log in to unmask]
Performance Software Group

Tel. (410) 788-6777 Fax (410) 788-4476

> Steve