sorry - got rambley

bit baffled by your Musk love/admiration.

I don't agree on the lie/whopper point - pressing the interviewer to name a specific thing on the record (with the consequent accusations of bias/slander/libel that might follow) meant that, professionally, the guy wasn't going to be able to answer it. Given prior notice of the question and the chance to select and clear examples you'd have got an answer.

As has been pointed out elsewhere, there's a fair bit of metaanalysis doing the rounds which backs up the general initial impressions he was asked to give.

The level of debate was sub-6th form, and shows nothing one way or another.

Mainly replied 'cos for all your winduppedness you're usually a bit more precise with your points (as, tbf, am I usually too, tho this really does feel a bit of a weird pile on on either side, with no minds being changed on either front).

Hope you're enjoying the warmer climes.

Posted By: Cardiff Canary, Apr 13, 22:35:11