Re: To Bob Badour, sorry

On 16 Jun 2006 02:34:50 -0700, "Cimode" <cimode_at_hotmail.com> wrote:

>Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>> On 15 Jun 2006 13:35:16 -0700, "Cimode" <cimode_at_hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> >What an empty accusation...I have observed this board for several weeks
>> >no and I saw BB's behavior I have tasted myself...Either people are
>> >infatuated with this guy or they just think he's sick.
>>
>> You are new to this group then. If you had been observing the
>> traffic for *years*, you would have seen repeats of kooks. I am glad
>> of Bob's efforts.

>Yes, I am new to this group which gives one advantage: objectivity.

     Not necessarily. It also gives you a severe disadvantage: no history.

>I don't give a damn about who's who and which role is assigned to
>whom...All I notice is that several debates become sterile because of
>close-mindedness of some people.

     There is your subjectivity.

     We are all biased. Some of us admit it, and some do not.

>I certainly do not need *years* to observe that this attitude just
>kills any free flowing of ideas which should be encouraged...Even if
>it's crap...

     No, but if you judge based on a limited time period, and others judge on a longer term, who is more likely to be more correct?

>To debunk kooks and VI, you must have authoritative and consensually
>recognized mastering of the concepts you're trying to defend. From
>reading his posts and positions, BB has not demontrated any of these...

     I think he has. Some others have posted similarly.

>He is no better than the people he pretends judging or educating...Even
>worse because his attitude just makes this NG an empty thinktak store.

     Maybe, you have not seen cdt when it has been drowned by kooks' posts? Bob has done a large part of the saving of us from that.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko Received on Fri Jun 16 2006 - 20:22:36 CEST