Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
This is silly excuse. It's purely cost.
This is disappointing that people that always seem to be able to reason and accept other thoughts are all of a sudden unable to connect that whether something is worth spending money on or not is directly connected to what is thought of as rate of return or in simpler terms... degree of risk vs. benefit.Indeed. The end.
Also Marni... up until that conversation closing response as if issued by a god of some sort, I always had nothing but respect for you. That was way below your reputation and should be way below your knowledge. I was really saddened to see that from you. Oh, well... I guess yet another illusion is shattered. Everyone, especially you, should know that I am not saying that is the only reason for it, but, all decisions relating justifying expenditure is based on things that go much deeper then "how much does it cost". Discussion also includes will it's inclusion enhance and give back it's expense in at least an equalizing degree. This does not anymore and will not anymore, plus the degree of liability is probably higher then any other thing on site. So yes, money is involved, but, all things are considered before any money is spent, not generally just money being spent.
BTW, if you don't want the silliness to continue.... Don't respond to it!!!!!!!