Brian:
Your first note was a rant. This second note is a study in contradictions. At least I could understand
Gordon's thesis.
Jim Smith
Managing Director
Cambridge Management Sciences, Inc.
4285 45th St. S.
St. Petersburg, FL 33711-4431
Tel: (727)866-6502 ext. 21
Fax: (727)867-7890
eMail: [log in to unmask]
Brian Ellis wrote:
> Jim
>
> I'm also addresing this to Edward, who wrote a similar message to
> your's.
>
> As you are probably aware from previous postings, I am sympathetic to
> Gordon's position concerning LF (but not concerning recycling, although
> I oppose the EU position on it).
>
> When I said he "went too far", my intention was to convey that he let
> his feelings run away with him to the extent that it negated the impact
> of his message, IMHO. My patent attorney used to tell me that a
> paragraph should never contain more than five lines, otherwise you can
> drive a horse and cart through it. So be it with this kind of argument:
> with long screeds, one tends to end up contradicting oneself. Besides
> which, with all due respect to him, there were several emotional notes
> creeping into the score. This is inevitable when one feels passionately
> about a subject. Passion without emotion is a contradiction in terms. At
> the ripe old age of 69, I'm still trying (with only partial success) to
> learn detachment from the subjects I feel passionately about and
> sustainability in engineering is one of those. I try to examine the
> holistic approach on this kind of matter, without being too judgmental.
> This means going back to the sources and their impacts, right through to
> the interment, examining all the side effects at each stage, including
> energy requirements, health & safety, the environment, the economy and
> so on. I try not to focus on a single aspect. However, I'm quite
> prepared to admit that this approach is still in its infancy, so we have
> to feel our way.
>
> I hope that this makes my statement clear.
>
> Brian
>
> Jim Smith wrote:
> >
> > Brian:
> >
> > You're right on one point; it's too late for Gordon to retrieve his digital message. You have
> > also satisfied my curiosity about whether you own and use a comprehensive thesaurus; obviously,
> > you do.
> >
> > But you're way out of line when accusing Gordon of "going too far, this time."
> >
> > Gordon has been one of the most moderate, restrained and scientific minds in electronics
> > assembly for as long as I can remember. His postings on this forum consistently serve to remind
> > me that there has been far too much conjecture and not nearly enough hard science with respect
> > to the lead issue. Today's essay (it was, after all, much more than the casually drafted notes
> > most of us drop in here) was one of Gordon's masterworks. Read it again if you believe it does
> > anything more offensive than state several points that should be evident to any science-oriented
> > individual:
> >
> > 1. Not all parties in the environmental movement are in it for selfless reasons; of course,
> > many are, but not all. The motives of some parties who were most active in elevating the fear of
> > lead in electronics are transparently self-serving; for example, I understand that the EU was
> > "advised" by an affiliate of the tin industry association. (Note that the tin industry reference
> > is my own and should not be attributed to Gordon.) These are the parties Gordon terms
> > "misleaders."
> > 2. Not all the parties whose environmental activism is based on the purest motives are free of
> > scientific misconceptions. This does not make them evil, only emotional captives of bad
> > "science." In Gordon's terms, these would be the "misled."
> > 3. When proven science contravenes "conventional wisdom," those of us in the sciences must
> > attempt to educate those who believe in fictional "facts;" that theme has been recurrent in
> > Gordon's postings for some time now. This is presenting the "evidence," which Gordon has done at
> > length lately. (The symmetry of Gordon's call for evidence, would be for the environmentalists
> > to provide evidence that the lead used in our industry is environmentally harmful.)
> > 4. I have moved Gordon's third point ("victims") to fourth because (a) I believe it works more
> > neatly into my exposition and (b) the stakes are much greater than Gordon has, in his typical
> > understated manner, laid out. Yes, banning lead would likely result in some premature
> > retirements of specialists in the tin/lead alloys but the better minds in that area are also
> > quite adept with respect to other alloys. My concept of "victims" would encompass the
> > electronics assembly companies and their customers. Most companies will be forced to acquire new
> > equipment, learn new process profiles and divert resources (human and monetary) that could
> > better be used in countless other ways. Their customers should expect to endure significantly
> > higher failure rates as process temperatures rise significantly.
> >
> > Finally, Brian, did you take the time to consider Gordon's list of questions that need to be
> > asked and answered before taking any position (for or against) banning lead?
> >
> > For my part, I read Gordon's thesis carefully and agree with his conclusion that we as an
> > industry must save ourselves by countering the "environmental" assertions known to be false and
> > questioning those for which there is no evidence either way. Or is the forum dominated by
> > individuals whose desire for lead removal is more concerned with personal security than
> > environmental issues?
> >
> > The parts of this posting that are not direct quotes from Gordon are my responsibility, not his.
> >
> > Jim Smith
> > Managing Director
> > Cambridge Management Sciences, Inc.
> > 4285 45th St. S.
> > St. Petersburg, FL 33711-4431
> > Tel: (727)866-6502 ext. 21
> > Fax: (727)867-7890
> > eMail: [log in to unmask]
> >
> > Brian Ellis wrote:
> >
> > > Gordon
> > >
> > > I don't see how you can recall it. You may ask the IPC to remove it but
> > > what has been said, has been said. The moving finger writes and, having
> > > writ, moves on. Nor all thy piety nor wit can move it back to cancel
> > > half a line.
> > >
> > > I can understand your wish to recall such a diatribe, tirade, lecture,
> > > lesson, preaching, reprimand, reproach, reproof, remonstration,
> > > remonstrance, scolding, oration, peroration, declamation, philippic,
> > > screed, exhortation, gasconade, vociferation, rhetoric, pontification,
> > > vituperation, rodomontade and possibly some other words that escape me
> > > for the moment. What I don't understand is that the interval between its
> > > publication and its recall is as short as 23 minutes, apparently without
> > > pressure.
> > >
> > > Maybe you have realised that you went too far, this time. I think you
> > > did.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > Brian
> > > "Davy, Gordon" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Davy, Gordon would like to recall the message, "Misleaders, misled, and
> > > > victims, and how to deal with them".
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > Leadfee Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
> > > > To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
> > > > the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Leadfree
> > > > To temporarily stop delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks send: SET Leadfree NOMAIL
> > > > Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > E-mail Archives
> > > > Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for additional
> > > > information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Leadfee Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
> > > To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
> > > the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Leadfree
> > > To temporarily stop delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks send: SET Leadfree NOMAIL
> > > Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > E-mail Archives
> > > Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for additional
> > > information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Leadfee Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
> > To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
> > the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Leadfree
> > To temporarily stop delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks send: SET Leadfree NOMAIL
> > Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > E-mail Archives
> > Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for additional
> > information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leadfee Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Leadfree
To temporarily stop delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks send: SET Leadfree NOMAIL
Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > E-mail Archives
Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for additional
information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
