Have to disagree with this characterization.

Post #37,721 by Ashton 5/7/02 1:45:57 AM Reply	Have to disagree with this characterization. Dunno if you were lurking in the "IWE" part of IWETHEY days, when a quite larger cross-section of folk visited the then (almost unique?) IW-Electric forum. Some were (eventually shown to be) rather habitual 'shills', active in other locales; at least one whose handle I recall ('daleross') appeared to be an active astroturf kinda guy. 'Khasim's methods of slicing through the puffery were, I thought in several bravura performances - most effective of all the many attempts. I still think that, in retrospect. Hell.. it's close-enough to the Socratic method, y'know? And if taking debate seriously is a negative - that would be in the spirit of our time, as lampooned by our Oz friend in his contrivance of N.I.C.E. (Nations Institute for Computing Excellence, IIRC), a refreshing interlude for us all - interspersed between the knock-down drag-outs with the forces from the Dark Side. Yes.. there was Diversity there! BTW I'm quite sure Khasim/Brandioch has corrected himself more than a few - or altered his criticism of a POV, when the espouser made his point clearer. I'm not in habit of indexing everything I've read though - so you may ignore my recollection if you want. As to bad blood - well... some folks do tend towards anger when they see / think they have seen a pattern of certain kinds of evasiveness. Let him who is without sin.. Overall I believe that, if you have (especially) a strongly held conviction which sounds a lot like daily cant, and your logic is sloppy in upholding it - expect to get little mercy. If that's Bad, then B. is Bad. As I am biased, for sharing B's POV on a number of hot-buttion Issuez as appear to arise periodically - from Org. religion to Corp. greed - you may dismiss my comments, or go back to some of the archives as once contained some collected gem-threads. Alas I don't know where these reside currently; think the EZ-board stuff from pub4 converted to 13? or vice-versa - worked a few months ago. This one from Infoworld is dead: [link\|http://forums.archive.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/displayForums.pl?archfors.htm\|forums.archive.infoworld] BeeP had some stuff on his site from IWE days - that link is dead too, I just noted. Maybe sometime - some of this shall hit CD. Maybe not. Here's a link to EZ which works except - what is linked doesn't (!) {sigh} [link\|http://pub13.ezboard.com/fiwetheyiwetheyforumguidelines.showMessage?index=187&topicID=6.topic\|EZ Board] Anyway.. calling Brandioch 'a troll' - is to demonstrate one's ignorance of what troll means IMnsHO, so I demur from the tut-tutting. Ashton
Post #37,741 by hnick 5/7/02 8:37:27 AM Reply	Re: Have to disagree with this characterization. I remember IWE. I was lurking there since 95 or 96. And I remember the shill wars as well. It is true that he supported positions similar to my own views. I am unconvinced that the "Enemy of my enemy is my friend" argument necessarily applies. Cutting through puffery... um, well, maybe... Socratic, I don't think so. He is gratuitously rude and he deliberately misstates opponents (always confrontational, never a reasonable discussion) position to set up a simplistic assault of one-liners. victim: Assert not A, Assert B, Assert C, draw conclusion. Brandi: Well, If A, your position is ridiculous, how stupid are you? He may or may not have corrected his position in the past. I don't usually follow his arguments too far and only see them if I am trying to see if someone else has something interesting to say. After the third or fourth wave of his assault he seems kind of bot like. Repetitive barking may relieve his boredom, but I find it wearisome. I also share his POV sometimes. At these times I find it distaseful to publicly side with a rabid rottweiler on methamphetamine. But that would be my problem. I probably have issues with defenders of the faith as well. In general, yeah, he occasionally has a really good rant, and his technical posts are worth reading, but the majority of his stuff seems tiresome to me. Different strokes, I suppose. I can't be too upset; I still come back... Hugh
Post #37,778 by Mike 5/7/02 12:25:13 PM Reply	Like your conclusion >>I can't be too upset; I still come back... That's exactly how I feel. I still choose to tangle and make myself part of the dynamic....so can it be all bad? Yet, there's a certain dishonesty which you feel you have to confront......in the hope of making the world an improved place. Unfortunately...I think I just end up feeding the fire. A: So its about children and adults? B: No A: So we ARE talking about children and adults though right? [ad nauseum] B: No A: At what ages do you think its "okay"? B: [specific answers] (for better or worse) A: You repeatedly REFUSE to answer my question! Its odd......and desperate........I'm inclined to think. Will we ever get back to the point that the professional/scientific community do see circumstances in which a relationship between a 15 year old and a 24 year old falls this side of the line of appropriate behavior? I very much doubt it. The reason.....he's lost that argument. So he'll want to have a different one instead. Thanks for hearing me out. -- William Shatner's Trousers --

Welcome to IWETHEY!