Mr./Mrs./Ms. kjk: You just responded publicly. Maybe I misread your original post, but you said: "if i'm misreading the original post and the call is to simply hire based on color, gender, religion, etc. then i'm completely opposed. any employee, it seems to me, has to be able to bring something tangible to the institution." What do you define as "something tangible?" Again, you're imposing some abstract desire to make people who can participate in museums more like the "standard," whatever the standard is at that particular point in time. You went on to say: "that is, if you want to hire minorities or women of specific backgrounds without prior museum experience, you are going to have to create positions where being a minority or woman of a specific background IS a field of expertise in itself. (i.e., as intern/consultants for specific exhibits, etc.)" SAY WHAT? "...IS a field of expertise in itself." Ladies and gentlemen patronize starts with a "P." The last thing I want to get into here on this fine list is into a rhetoric war, just want to bring light to ISSUES which are IMPORTANT. My apologies for misrepresenting your comments. A remedy would be to be concise and clear. Or not respond at all, if it's not really that important to you. It's your call. I like real food myself. I quite don't follow you "kjk." Partly to blame is because we're not face to face, best characterized by what Robin said a few posts back: "we are really musing out loud, as it were, except that it is silent via the computer. The convenience almost, but not quite, makes up for not being able to see each other's faces so one could tell if the other meant something to be funny, or express concern or something else entirely." I too, miss Los Angeles. These POSTS are really multi-layed. Miguel :)