I love it. I have lived in DFW for the past 20 years and could never figure out the bus/train system to get where I wanted to go. If I used the public transit website, it would tell me that I couldn’t get from A to B using public transit.

I’ve used public transit in cities all over the world and was able to mostly figure it out in a short time, so maybe this advice won’t be so helpful for everyone, but in Dallas, I couldn’t do it without Google.

Now to be fair if Trents article only contained these best of lists it would be a rip off of the content of Consumer Reports, but he mixed these lists inn with his own thoughts and as such should be considered original material.

On the other hand, if I remember correctly the deleted articles with summaries only contained page numbers and the name of the article. There was little or no original content in those articles, and to be fair should be deleted if the content owner objected.

Consumer Reports objected to these summaries, Trent complied and deleted the summaries and all references to content about Consumer Reports. If he felt that was the best choice then that is his choice, although I personally feel that it was a wrong choice.

Then months go by with little or no reference to Consumer Reports, and then one day a big post about them, and it is then that I start to complain.

My complaint is that: If he has accepted to do as they say and delete all references to content about Consumer Reports earlier, then in my view he should also not give any references to the contents of Consumer Reports in the future. The article in mention is then a clear violation of that principle.

It costs $20 for the full version, but the demo is plenty of fun.

I didn’t read this sentence to mean open communion is practiced IN ORDER TO encourage discussion with people of all faiths. Which conversely would mean closed communion is practiced IN ORDER TO discourage discussion with people of all faiths. I think Trent was just linking two similar concepts with “and” in the same sentence.

Tell us Top 10 interesting critical feedback given to your blog by the commenters.

Let me explain a bit. ( You can skip this explanation if you are quoting my above question).

(Means : What most people say they don’t like about your blog. Okay, that might at times border on what they don’t like about you. It could be what most people say or what most affects you. )

I would prefer, if you don’t give your defences in the same post, just the pure criticism. You can cover your defences for a later post, because it might make the critical feedback post sound too defensive or as an attempt to dilute the commenters’s viewpoint. Something like a bonus issue acknowledging the critical comments.

It would not only make an interesting post, but also might provide insights on what brickbats other bloggers can expect in the rise to glory like yours.

Of course, do it only if you are comfortable and if you think some benefit may occur.

Faith is not a choice? Well, I guess I could understand that in the sense that all humans seem to be hardwired to believe in something above ourselves. It may be a holdover from the parent-child relationship that makes us yearn for some kind of authority in the universe. Or it may just be wishful thinking that prayer or good works may somehow improve our fate.

Whatever the case, I get an icky feeling about anything with the word “evangelical” attached because so many people who call themselves evangelists have aggrandized themselves by taking advantage of the gullible. Trent doesn’t seem to be bent on social domination and rampant material gain, so I shan’t lump him in with Jim and Tammy Faye Baker just yet. Nevertheless, my advice is “REPENT, TRENT!” before any more of your income or individuality gets sucked into the maw of organized religion. There are so many nicer ways to spend Sunday morning than voluntarily surrendering to mind control.

If you have an independent child like mine was, she refused to do something just because it was a rule – she didn’t have to go potty so she wasn’t going in there!! So we told her that was ok, she didn’t have to actually go to the bathroom, but she did have to sit on the potty and count to 10 (20 as she got older). This was enough of a compromise that she was willing to do it, and trust me, if you can sit bare-butt on a toilet for 10 seconds and not actually go, then you’re either really stubborn or you really don’t have to go.

Now if they (Consumer Reports) do not want to be mentioned then why have you mentioned them again?

I am not trying to troll, but I am troubled by censorship. I know you love Consumer Report, and even today you linked to them as you say they are your first stop for big purchases. But you must have gotten some nasty mail from them which made you remove all references to them.

So according to your own words you must either remove that new article because it contains references to Consumer Report or you must stick to the principles of free speech and not remove any posts about them. Or is there a third solution?

I think the question was more how can faith not be a choice. You either choose to believe something or you don’t. And if you can’t choose what happens to you after you die by anything you do here, what’s the point of any religion or faith at all?