Re: OT - Best way to handle dbdebunk

From: paul c <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 17:26:31 GMT
Message-ID: <bvJIf.12513$H%4.12057@pd7tw2no>

Marshall Spight wrote:
> Bob Badour wrote:
>

>>Marshall Spight wrote:
>>
>>Your suggestion would have more merit if the group actually discussed
>>any real theory.

>
>
> Sometimes real theory is discussed and sometimes it isn't. We had
> a rockin' good thread a while back on a paper Vadim wrote called
> "Relational Algebra as Distributive Lattice." I am still digesting
> the implications. Not every experience can be a peak one.
> ...

Me too. I wish that thread were still active, even though I had very little to contribute. It was the generalized union that caught my eye.   Although I gather that in itself isn't new (I've been told that BS12 had it), the paper seemed very creative in applying it.

When the thread stopped, I was still trying to dig how projection is embodied in the generalized union, how "->" embodied RENAME, what generalized union means to de Morgan law and the tantalizing part about transitive closure. Admittedly when I read the paper, I couldn't help comparing it to TTM chapter 4, (except for the lattice part which was even more over my head).

Maybe I'll try again,
p

ot everyone can be a Jan Hidders or a Vadim Tropashko.
> Michael Jordon by himself does not a basketball team make.
>
>
>

>>When I returned here, I saw self-promoting ignorants
>>engaged in public acts of mental masturbation (as always), and one or
>>two people trying to make the best of a bad situation.

>
>
> I encourage you to join the latter group! (Not that I consider the
> situation particularly bad. Is it much better in any other context,
> do you think?)
>
>
>

>>When well over 90% of the content of the group is nonsense posted by
>>self-promoting ignorants who are unable to respond to substantive
>>critique, it seems disingenuous to suggest one may not point that out.

>
>
> I think it is perfectly acceptable to point out when you think some
> idea or another is nonsense. Critiquing someone's character is
> unnecessary if you actually refute their arguments.
>
>
>

>>Given the extremely low signal to noise ratio, it seems doubly
>>disingenuous to suggest one may not point others toward the signal.

>
>
> I encourage you to point others towards the signal. You'll be
> more effective in doing so if you do it in a way that is within
> the bounds of polite discourse. Consider how marginalized
> Fabian Pascal is; without his very-low-traffic website, no one
> would have heard of him at all. This has nothing to do with
> his ideas and everything to do with his appalling rudeness.
>
>
> Marshall
>
Received on Wed Feb 15 2006 - 11:26:31 CST