Over the Shock and GALing 6

[Dia]

FWIW, I don't happen to agree with that post. Perhaps I'm reading it wrong, but it sounds like it invalidates the idea that there were any real problems in the M at all. It sounds like it discounts any real reasons the WAS may have had for becoming WAS-y, as well as any real attempts the WAS may have made to speak up, ask for change, etc. It sounds like it lays the fault pretty squarely on the WAS and virtually none on the LBS. It also specifies that the WAS seeks whatever is missing form a third party, and there isn't always a third party involved.

While I'm sure that post is the case at least some of the time, there are plenty of LBS here who will admit 1) that the WAS has/had valid gripes, 2) that they discounted the validity of said gripes until the WAS really did walk, and 3) only got serious about addressing any valid issues after the walk.

Could most WAS have done more, communicated better, tried harder? Probably. Could most LBS have listened better, validated more, admitted their own role in the demise of the M sooner? Probably.

<shrug>

One person's opinion.