>In a message dated 97-04-09 00:30:18 EDT, you write:
><< But I wonder why Dale, who writes so frequently and in so much depth,
> doesn't bother to have his facts in order. With these flagrant errors
> on facts so obvious in the Sudbury Valley School literature and in
> this discussion group, it seems to me that Dale Reed lacks
> credibility. >>
>Hey, Mike! Lighten up! I appreciate you setting the record straight =
>still I think we have room for Dale, who at least makes the effort to =
>about his own principles and assumptions and then examines the world,
>including SVS, through that lens. Sharing his musings with the rest of =
>at least a contribution to the "idea pool", whether or not any one of us
>agrees or disagrees.
Thanks Alan, you are quite correct. I was a bit carried away by my
perception of a polarizing nature to the post. My apologies to Dale
Reed and to all subscribers to this list.