To: "INTERNET:seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org" <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Subject: RE: ACI 355.2
From: Mark Gilligan <MarkKGilligan(--nospam--at)compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 15:50:58 -0500
You make the assumption that I understand both sides of the argument. I do
not and so far I have been unable to obtain a good explination of the real
issues for the reasons previously mentioned.
What I do not like is the use of litigation by ITW or by others to stifle
Why not summarize both sides of the argument for us as most of us are only
able to read what the Anchor manufacturers argument has been. ACI has not,
as I am able to tell, been willing to post information discussion the
changes (which the Anchor companies have posted in PDF format) and their
rationalization for the sudden change.
As I mentioned, I have separated the actions from the importance of the
changes made. Why not fill the professional community in on the arguments
from both sides? I know this means taking the time to write it up, but
perhaps you can provide an unbiased description of the issues of both sides
of the argument and allow the professional community to decide if the
in which it was handled was justified.
I would appreciate it!