<HTML>In a message dated 5/2/02 10:41:54 AM Central Daylight Time, johnsond@stolaf.edu writes: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Nothing personal Wim. So please don't take it that way when your ideas aren't savored the way you like. We all know that feeling.   Be patient, your turn will come. Sorry too if I speak too strongly. have a good day, Dennis. </BLOCKQUOTE> Dennis. Thank you for your remarks. They are greatly appreciated. Like Mike's comments, they are positive. I apologize if my approach was strong. I am more than willing to listen to suggestions, and reason, to make changes, or even throw out the entire idea, if my plan is deemed unusable. But the feelings I got from Fred's comments were that my plan is not worthy of even a look see ONLY because I've been doing this for only 9 moths, and ONLY because the other plan is under consideration. As I have said many time, I greatly appreciate and respect all the work that has been done in the past. If it weren't for all that work, we wouldn't even be where we are today. There have been many times, in committees, in Council, and even in our own work, where a completely new idea changed how the final product was arrived at. In some of the communications I have seen, there seems to be confusion. When we met in Rochester, at the end there were more questions than answers. I am asking questions that will hopefully answer some of question we have about the formula. If those answers solve some of the problems, then we will have a better and more workable formula. If they can't be answered, then perhaps we should consider a new approach. Again, Dennis, thanks for your comments. Wim</HTML>