Hi Jamie,

The paper is attached.  One of the more surprising outcomes, for me,
was to discover just how controversial the methodology was.  And by
controversial I don't just mean that it was criticized, but that there
were strong proponents (other than me) on both sides of the debate.
The paper is probably a lot longer than it really needs to be, mainly
because we devoted a lot of material to addressing the methodological
issues.  If you do use it in your class, you might therefore consider
using it as a focal point for a methodology discussion about how in
general one tackles these kinds of problems.

Hope to see you at PST'05 ...

Best regards,
Scott