Posted By:
Brian GoldnerYou're missing my point.
Read my original post again.
I didn't say that was against an updated version of the ACC.
What i did say is that there is a right way to approach it, and a wrong way, as well.
This messageboard can lay the groundwork for an updated version, but decisions such as these, must still be made by committee, in a format similar to what i suggested in my earlier post.
I realize that a few people want to grab the ball and run with it, but i'm sorry, it's just not yours or my ball to grab and run with.
I am not questioning anyone's hobby credentials here, but only by committee, would we have Burdick's credentials, or the authority to bring about such change.
Would Burdick want his work to be updated?
My guess is: conditionally yes, but only under a set of circumstances similar, to what i have described.
I'm just saying, that a consensus must be built, in order for meaningful change to occur.