Quote:
Well, I think that it would be valid to point out that Union Carbide and Exxon both retained their identity after their horrific debacles.

It would be valid, indeed, and relevant. They were trying to say the point was irrelevant although I think they had lost track of DLC's input. Now I'm not saying that BP will never change its name - only that its commitment to the small people deflates the possibility.

Quote:
However, it would be equally valid to point out that other companies have in fact changed their names after disastrous events ... so that's probably a toss-up in terms of a convincing harbinger of what may or may not happen with BP moving forward in this instance ...

I can't think of anyone doing so over here - maybe a 75 per cent vote isn't needed elsewhere.

Quote:
Using UC and Exxon as a baseline for disaster response is pretty weak, though. Saying that BP's response is "second to none" simply because it sucks less than Union Carbide's or Exxon's isn't really saying a whole lot ...

No I'd say the point is valid a fortiori because UC and Exxon suck and and BP don't but a viewpoint doesn't have to be right to be relevant, of course.

Quote:
Using Svanberg's "small people" phrasing is cute, though. More chum makes for tasty chum

I don't agree with that, old chum. I noticed that quite a few of you lot thought he was insulting the victims but my take was that he was expressing a laudable sentiment in his second language.

km