>>246
I thought abot your final comment, that my experiences will tell you
very little things, whereas my impressions and my ideas could be very
clear under the condition that I will hurt nobody.

I'd like you to be aware of the fact that the surroundings are very
likely to be quite noisy, so that we have to choose the right one to
respond seriously. Then, for the purpose to identify yourself without
much difficulties, I'd like you to fix some name just like
"kita-shirakawa" or "hyakuman-ben" with your "trip sequence". With
such an id, I'm going to be relatively easy to respond to you.

I think you had already noticed in your message >>238, you/I cannot
be precise to describe the ugly part of the department(s). This is one
of the most difficult part of the discussion of this type. But still,
the advantages are that people are free to join with being anonymous,
and furthermore, lots of number of people are the potential audience.

So, be careful, but we can try to proceed, okay.

P.S.By the way, how do you think abot the statement like >>218 of this
page? Do you think that the database/inside of MathSciNet is reliable,
to which extent? I wonder so much that any kind of this type cannot be
100% okay.