Yes, I am aware of the fact that there's another thread on this topic, over a year old, which is still right at the top of this forum. However I feel that it's immense size is naturally making it rather inaccessible to those who haven't been following it for that whole year. Furthermore all we are seeing in that thread, currently, are sporadic spurts of the exact same arguments which have been addressed over and over again deep within the inaccessible bowels of the beast. For these reasons I propose we start over with a blank slate and a few clear ground rules. What I would like to see here is not another endless rehash of the same points again and again and again without any heed being given to responses which have already addressed those concerns (unless they are offered as an explanation for why the assessment of the concerns raised are unsatisfactory). In other words I expect to see a proper debate of point and counter point, with posters listening to each other’s cases, and responding to them as such, as opposed to having a bunch of goof balls talking to themselves as though to re-affirm the rhetoric they already believe while ignoring any discussion of the particular issues which that rhetoric brings forward. It's entirely alright if we begin with some of the basic arguments which have been put forth time and time again in the original thread, but this time let's actually move forward from there and attempt to maintain a coherent nonregresive dialogue. If these terms seem acceptable to any of you, then let by all means let the debate begin. A note to Tiassa: I’ve seen that you’re rather frustrated with the way things have been going in several threads as well, and I do hope that this is an appropriate way to attempt to organize the discourse in a more coherent, and hopefully productive manner. However if you think this thread’s aim is too redundant or just a silly idea in general, I certainly won’t take it personally if you feel it should be moved or deleted. I just figured it was worth a shot.