Guilty as charged Shambles.

I think Neil has, eloquently as always, made the point I would have wished to make. Sure, I get worn with the folk discussions, but as new people come along, they DO often add different perspectives. But we also have some people come along who simply throw up the same old tired cliches. OK, I can understand that to a degree. What truly set me off was a post saying that the writer wasn't going to bother reading anything else and then stating an opinion which had been put forth dozens upon dozens of times before as though it were an original thought!!!

I know I may be the biggest smart-assed jerk in the place, but on those times when I welcome new folks, generally one line I always include concerns researching old threads. I read this forum and many old threads for almost three months before I made my first post. I'm not suggesting that as some sort of requirement, but to totally negate everything that has been said here........?????? I like Neil's line above re: "I have a perspective which may have been overlooked" after reading what has been said before. Indeed, different perspectives and ideas come up EVERY time and there are new ones in the two threads running now regarding "folk." We will probably always have repeated topics here....its only natural. I would ask only that those posting might spend a bit of time backchecking first.

Neil, once again, you have made a wonderful point in a fine manner. Thank you for your clarity, the Prozac must be working! (:<))

Spaw