As my letter (Brit. Birds 97: 302) was clearly not opposed to taxonomic lists per se, I am rather miffed that Martin Collinson should imply that I am some backwoodsman who might prefer to see birds listed alphabetically or by size. He did, however, use one word that I ought to have used В­ stability В­ and I am proud to stand alongside Mayr & Bock (`Provisional classifications versus standard avian sequences: heuristics and communication in ornithology', Ibis 136: 1218), among others, on that point. In fact, my attitude has been hardened by the news that 50-100 new phylogenetic studies of birds are published each year. Even Collinson admits that `no-one would agree that the current order of the Western Palearctic list will ultimately be shown to be correct; there are many more changes that could be proposed'. What a prospect. If such proposals are made, but not acted upon until a major re-think is fully researched, discussed and agreed, well and good, but scientists in all fields (including taxonomists) should occasionally be prepared to accept that, because something can be done, it is not necessarily a good idea to do it straightaway.