Re: Objects and Relations

On Feb 12, 12:31 am, Bob Badour <bbad..._at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> JOG wrote:
>
> It went on so long because you kept feeding the troll, Jim.

I don't agree the original post was merely troll bait - its far too easy a term to throw about (although we have our fair share on cdt). Here it is over-exuberance in an idea, without anywhere near sufficient exploration or research. There is a whole host of reasons that nonsense is generated and trolling is just one of them. It implies intention, whereas in this case, imo it is more naivite and obstinancy in the arguments.

There are people out there who will make mistakes, but are capable of rectifying them in time. Maybe not as quickly as people like yourself, vadim, jan, etc., and definitely not within the remit of a single thread, but they /can do/ eventually. That is why I'd encourage you to keep your forthright stance but without resorting to insults over a single thread.

I find your best posts are the latter (and *especially* think they read the best to new readers).

>
> I sincerely hope you take my other suggestions to heart.

You can rest assured that I give all your suggestions thought, and think there are a lot of perceptive points there.

> I would like to
> see more of the sort of content that Vadim and Marshall generate when
> they are playing with the math.

Totally agree.

> You have mentioned teaching. I hope you
> find a way to produce educated students proofed against some of the
> nonsense they will see.

Aye, it has become a bit of an obsession in fact. I'd also like to see more online resources for creating such nonsense-proofing, especially now dbdebunk appears to have been wound down. But that's another thread.

>
> >>This has been done to varying degrees by different members of cdt.
> >>For your part Jim, you have some admirable qualities. I also found
> >>the discussions with Marshall to be worthwhile.
>
> > Imho the line of thinking you have made needs far more thought,
> > research and maturing - but importantly this must always be combined
> > with a willingness to reject it completely if needs must (which I
> > believe itself takes a lot of character - however there is still
> > always value in the process, as it can produce better and more focused
> > ideas).
>
> >>Anyway, I've come to the conclusion I can do better things with my
> >>time.
>
> Hear! Hear!
Received on Mon Feb 12 2007 - 11:02:54 CET