Al,
I'm only a couple hours out of surgery (eye, lens implant).

I don't know if I've been in on all of the discussion on this issue. I and
another board member have generally supported you when Web site issues came
up.

I don't think the main issue with the board is Web sites, though. We all
have a copy of an e-mail that you sent to Kim Lovering and that has become
the leading issue. It really is a rude one and the board is embarrassed by
it.

Honestly, if someone started an AG newsletter (which may well happen), I
would not be offended. If I saw a need to make suggestions to the editor of
that newsletter, that's what I would do. The AG committee goes out of
business in a year so I don't see any threat in what they may do and if I
can help make their work look better, then I'll do that.

As I said, the issue has become the e-mail message and not the Web site
disagreement. I'm not sure whether I'll be able to attend the board meeting
tonight or not.

'Til later,
Bill



----- Original Message -----
From: "Al Heigl" <alheigl@rconnect.com>
To: "William T. Conlan" <bill@conlan.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 2:09 PM
Subject: Re: AG 2003 - Website Fiasco


> Hi, Bill --
>
> I've been wondering if I'd hear from you weighing in on whatever this
> hooey is really all about ...
>
> I do suspect that if some Committee designated a person to design a
> flyer for their project, and it turned out to be a 5-1/4 x 8-1/2 booklet
> with a colored cover and "Mennsajenda" at the top, with poorly laid out
> and misspelled pages, you'd be rather unhappy with it all. Especially
> if they then tried to take it out on *you* to cover for *their*
> mistakes.
>
> Hope I have your support on this -- I'd surely do the same for you.
>
> Regards,
>
> Al
>