I missed belonging to a team forum.
As long as DRingdahl doesn't ask me to leave, I will be here.
Some folks at Find-a-Drug are a bit too, shall we say, disingenuous. I'm afraid that I have little tolerance for those that blindly defend what can be demonstrated to be flawed. I am not attacking FaD but flaws, errors, omissions, and poi (Plain Old Incorrect) problems need to be brought into the sunlight, examined objectively, and solved -- not defended, obfuscated, and denied. Maybe I have said too much but I believe that too often in the past, really great ideas have been ruined by zealous folks defending the idea from any perception of a flaw and thereby that which does not need a defense. The FaD goal is still an extremely noble one. Alas, the genius behind FaD, we as volunteers, and the researchers using the results are all too human and fallible. I will say that without Keith Davies, FaD would probably not be possible. Many geniuses fail in that they lack common sense or get lost in the noble effort and forget that what they consider to be "minor" flaws start out as pebbles but fall on we volunteers like boulders. I am pleased that there is a strong promise that some basic issues facing FaD may come to resolution and closure in a reasonable and timely manner.
Enough of my drivel.
Glad to be aboard.