|
Steve,
As you are aware, unfortunately there is a name calling issue going on between Don and myself. If you subscribe to his line of thinking on that matter rather than mine, so be it. I'm a big boy.
With respect to you, I originally took exception to the term kludge, which I thought we had already discussed and put to bed.
My last post to you, as I think you would agree, only provided what seemed to be factual information that I have found, and was not presented in an offensive manner. Just info that I obtained. I really don't see why you should be upset about what I wrote to you.
As has been said in many different ways during this thread, good and accurate information is sometimes hard to get. Uncovering info from alternate sources and putting the pieces together many times will ultimately get to the truth. As I mentioned previously during the hi-gloss weight debate. It was only after others started making calculations on hi-gloss materials that sufficient info was collected and brought to the attention of Montana that the correct numbers began to surface.
With respect to the base topic of this thread, many people think there is something not quite right with the weight numbers presented by Montana. Perhaps so, perhaps not. But taking a look at the situation from different angles and obtaining info from other sources hopefully will bring favorable results.
|