?> >who is talking is extremely important

> When we are discussing facts, rather than biased opinions, it is not 
> important who stated the fact.

Interesting points and a topic that comes up periodically.  In fact it was 
Andy's tag line.

> ttul, Andy-
>
> (c)Permission is given to copy this document
> in any form, or to print for any use.
>
> (w)OPINIONS are not necessarily facts. USE  AT OWN RISK!

If only it were that simple.  Distinguishing facts from opinion can be 
difficult and that is where 'creds' and track record come in.  Even then, 
people sometimes speculate or hypothesize, and, of course, even the most 
reliable sources can be wrong on occasion.

For general discussion among BEE-L members, attributions to the previous writer 
typically get in the way, since they can sound personal and argumentative, and 
since the context is already (hopefully) known by readers.

On the other hand, when discussing ideas associated with authorities or news 
sources, attributions are useful for providing clues as to  context, source and 
credibility and to give credit where credit (or derision) where such is due. 
Knowing the source provides clues, only though.  Even a broken clock is correct 
twice a day, and even the National Enquirer has broken stories of substance 
that the 'respectable' papers missed.

Attributions should be accurate and also not to "off the record" speculations 
or ad hoc answers to hypothetical questions made by researchers when 
encountered in the corridor or the bar.  Ideas of that sort, if attributed, 
should be attributed to "a researcher" or "a usually reliable source". 

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html

Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm