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
