Dear Gunnar Jonny,

I am sorry that I could not reply to you sooner, for I had to leave home to meet a friend.

Thank you for writing me and expressing your concern. If English is indeed not your native tongue then we already have something fundamental in common.

I would really appreciate if you could bring yourself to analyze these issues from diverse angles without assuming that the problems necessarily lie wholly on one side. Very often, a group of people tends to be composed of like-minded individuals who have self-selected each other because they share similar tastes and outlooks. Many of these individuals also often like and react well to their friends' qualities that they themselves have, or at least do not lack them to such an extent that they feel inadequate or incompetent. Whilst this cohesion is good for the group dynamics and bonding processes, it will also restrict the ability of these individuals to assimilate or understand new or foreign ideas, especially those that are contrary to or deviate from the norms, values and assumptions that have permeated these circle of individuals. In other words, group members are likely to react in similar fashion (whether positively or negatively) as a result of their own allegiance and conformity towards each other. With this analysis in mind, you may be able to put a handle on why "there are several members here who get a similiar [sic] reaction to it", as you observed.

Furthermore, even if the forgoing analysis can be dismissed, could it just be possible that some of these individuals are too quick to judge, dismiss and vilify something and/or someone that they have yet to be able to understand and appreciate?

If you had understood the context in which I use the horse as a metaphor, then you would realise that it was a multi-purpose receptacle that served to reflect the rounds of vilification, ignorance and misunderstanding that certain members have been indulging themselves in. I would much prefer them exercising more understanding than typecasting people, even though the former takes more time and patience, and requires the suspension or reassessment of initial judgements or vilifications.

In answering your question about university education, I know from first-hand experience that some people who already have or are still securing university education or degree(s) cannot even write, think or behave half as well as you do. So, a university education is no panacea. Even though it gives you a specialised means of excelling in certain vocations or professions, it does not guarantee good character and wisdom. The acquiring of the status of an authority and the degree of erudition in a specific field of knowledge do not necessary translate to maturity and clarity of thinking in other fields or in the broader sphere of life. And that is one of the important reasons why I would much prefer people to understand and judge my thoughts, writings and the TAMMY project by their merits and benefits, rather than by people's superficial perception and mentioning of my credentials, or by how good/bad a musician I am to them, or by how excellent/pathetic a keyboard arranger I am.

As I wrote to Bazz Wood once: You and I know that we can't please everyone, despite our best effort(s) and/or intention(s). Misunderstanding aside, feelings can easily become fragile and frayed for some people. But, we should keep hoping and looking for the best in our fellow beings, should we not?

On a lighter note, I do like your sudden move to spice up two of my threads with animated graphics, even if it is done at my expense. There is an impish humour in you. It could be a sign that you may well be the dark horse in the Synth Zone ----- if I may be so bold as to speak of horses again.

All the best, my friend, if I may call you as such.