Subject: [BoundaryPoint] BoundaryPoint - More tightening<br/>
Date: Feb 10, 2004 @ 15:28<br/>
Author: Kevin Meynell (Kevin Meynell &lt;knm@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="13139.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="13143.htm">Next</a>&emsp;[<a href="topic13119.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="13139.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="13141.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-1538819563">Mike,<br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt;maybe these points were missed because their names were unfamiliar to <br/>
&gt;newer members<br/>
<br/>
 </span></blockquote>Your admirable multipointing credentials have never been in question. The <br/>
question is whether there is any scope in this group to provide some <br/>
context as to why multipoints exist in the first place, or even to add <br/>
occasional humorous anecdotes about those things that thwart our quest? It <br/>
would seem this is allowed for certain members of the group, but not others <br/>
despite the much-vaunted personal sovereignty of each of us. I&#39;m happy to <br/>
live with the group consensus on this, but it would be nice to have some <br/>
consistency.<br/>
<br/>
Cheers,<br/>
<br/>
Kevin Meynell</div>