sci

There's a reasonable amount of evidence that following (generally) a diet as outlined in the article would be beneficial to one's health across the spectrum. Google 'paleolithic diet' (alternative spelling, 'palaeolithic') for further information.

It might well be this article for those interested in reading it themselves: - "Effects of Acute Smoked Marijuana on Complex Cognitive Performance" - Neuropsychopharmacology section of the medical journal Nature

URL: http://www.nature.com/npp/journal/v25/n5/full/1395716a.html

This is great, works very simply and the results look fantastic! I've just created a few to buttons to use on my latest project and they're perfect for my needs - all in less time than it would take to open up PS and create just one button! An awesome app and I wish you every success with it, I second the call for a PayPal link/contribute link, I think many a time-starved designer would happily drop a few $ your way in gratitude.

Well sorry, it simply isn't. It's a very basic logical flaw, a fallacy of extension (it's extremely common, oft referred to as the straw man argument) - instead of arguing against the issue, namely the right of the user to alter their perception of received content to better suit their person, you are suggesting that the poster (and their argument) inherently supports the redistribution of that altered content to third parties without the content producer's permission - nowhere in the the post was that assertion made - you made it up all by yourself and then attacked that. So Yes, your logic is flawed, awfully sorry, I know, it's so annoying when that truth thing gets in the way.

That's not, imho, a fair comparison - the user agent has the right to alter their perception of the content (strip ads, enlarge font size, have a screen-reader read it) - nowhere in that did the poster suggest that they are then free to re-distribute that content on to other users as your post suggests. I (humbly) put it that your logic is flawed.