Editorial
Friend:
I know! I killed Smith’s Report two months ago! So what’s this? After I killed SR, I said I was going to keep you informed monthly of what’s going on here. If I’m going to write you monthly, what am I going to call the letter I write? I’ve got to call it something. How are people going to identify it? That-thing-Smith-writes-once-a-month? Why not call it, well—Smith’s Report?
I needed to make fundamental changes here, because fundamental changes have occurred in my life and with how I can handle this work, which I feel obligated to do.
I didn’t have to kill Smith’s Report. I had to make the changes. They say consistency is a primary requirement of a newsletter. On the surface, consistency doesn’t appear to be my strong point. At the same time, here I am, after an eleven-year revisionist escapade, eager to get on with the work.
Bibliographic information about this document: Smith's Report, no. 23, May 1995, p. 1
Other contributors to this document: n/a
Editor’s comments: n/a