Matthew Hunter writes: > You should try to understand the root causes of a particular > tradition before advocating it be tossed out, but that > understanding is not required in order for the tradition to be > useful; in fact, the tradition is most useful in the absence of > understanding. > You're almost implying, it seems, that once you understand the process > behind a tradition, you destroy the tradition, much in the way that > explaining a joke destroys the joke. I am offended, sir. I do nothing halfway or almost. ;) Well... if it isn't a tradition anymore, then what is it? rone -- "I don't even know you. What if you're a psycho?" "Would a psycho waste the last of his triple-sec?" -- RICHH