Originally Posted by traderumor
Haven't read the report in its entirety, but did skim through the entire report, which I made clear in an earlier post. I did just get done reading the first part of the report word for word.
My questioning stems from the difference between reading and analyzing, the latter which is necessary to make informed conclusions. The conclusions you have stated have been general, broad sweeping statements indicitave of someone reading a document with less than an open mind. In other words, I would hope that you wouldn't walk into a classroom with an assignment of a 400 page report, make the few flippant remarks you made, and then stand on "well, I read the report" as the basis for a high grade.
Are my conclusions really "indicitave of someone reading a document with less than an open mind" or is it that they just disagree with yours? I'd suggest that I'm not the one suffering from a less than open mind.
Once again, read the whole document, give yourself whatever time you feel you need to reach whatever you feel to be an analytical conclusion and then answer this: do we understand this issue anymore today than we did last Tuesday night?
Anyway, I'd suggest you read the damn thing before arguing it's merits.