Subject: Multi, Schmulty...<br/>
Date: Sep 04, 2003 @ 12:59<br/>
Author: spookymike@aol.com (spookymike@...)<br/>
Prev&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="11539.htm">Next</a>&emsp;[<a href="topic11533.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="11532.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="11534.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-597419969">To the 15 of 18 of us who have voted in the poll, and judging by the many <br/>
posts on this subject, it seems that the only one of us who has a problem with <br/>
the mixing of multipoint and other boundary related stuff is the owner of this <br/>
group.  For the rest of us, it seems a non-issue.  <br/>
<br/>
Personally, Mike, I think the group works beautifully as is.  To rigidly <br/>
insist that discussion be limited only to multipoints seem silly and impractical, <br/>
IMHO.  We boundary fans (to include multipoints as a subcategory) are never <br/>
going to be numerous.  Why chase any of us away and end up with splinter groups? <br/>
 I don&#39;t see that messages about non-purely multipoint matters clog up the <br/>
mail or cause anyone extra work, other than maybe having to hit the delete <br/>
button a few extra times for messages that are not of interest.<br/>
<br/>
Mike, as the owner of the group, you have the ultimate hammer, but I would <br/>
suggest you go with the flow and let this issue die a quiet death.  I believe <br/>
you&#39;ll find the wider range of posts interesting, and that multipoints will <br/>
continue to receive the special attention they deserve.<br/>
<br/>
Mike Schwartz</div>