<HTML>In a message dated 4/16/02 7:03:06 PM Central Daylight Time, piano@charlesneuman.net writes: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">As for the rule, I understand the point of keeping people from creating their own levels of superiority, but I think that rule raised some freedom of speach issues. </BLOCKQUOTE> I don't think it is a matter of freedom of speech. I think it is an ethics matter. Again, using a doctor as an example. I don't think it would be ethical for a doctor to say he graduated Summa cum laude. As long as the electronic test is equal to the aural test, we shouldn't be allowed to differentiate. Another support for this is that it has not been proven that one is superior to the other. Maybe you are a better tuner because you use an ETD, but that doesn't necessarily mean you are better than an aural tuner, or vise a versa. And when you put wording in your advertising that implies you are a better tuner, then that, I think, is a violation of our ethics. Wim</HTML>