Klarinet Archive - Posting 000322.txt from 2002/07

From: Gil Guerrero <gilster@-----.com>
Subj: [kl] Track Record
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 08:48:38 -0400

To all of the other wankers on the list from one of the lurking
wankers: If I unsubscribed every time I thought someone was an
intolerant jerk on this list, I would not have made it past the first
digest.

Bill Wright has correctly qualified his initial support for Dan,
since none of us attended whatever off-list conflict the titans, Dan
and Luby, had:

<snip>

>Apparently Dan and Luby had words off-list before the
>rest of us were made aware of the battle.

<snip>

I'm not sure whether this may have been some religious or race
baiting, and frankly don't care. You're adults, delete it, and get on
with your life.

But Bill also wants to make sure that we all understand the poor old
Dan is just misunderstood and is really a great helpful guy, and that
Luby isn't:

<snip>
>Dan has a considerable 'track record' over
>a number of years for providing useful
>information and substantive opinions.
>Luby does not. (Luby has a 'track record'
>that you can search in the archives.)
<snip>

You're right, Luby has a track record of being off-topic and
seemingly operating on a bizarre dimension that many (all?) of us
don't understand.

You're also correct: Dan has a reputation for scholarship and useful
information.

He also has a reputation for baiting people into his periodic
diatribes about unquantifiable sound characteristics ("dark tone?"
anyone? anyone?) As Gary Smith correctly pointed out, he also likes
to slam newbies who have the temerity to have a newby's set of
opinions on tone or equipment.

I've often seen this in scientists, and Dan's advanced math degrees,
his position as a computing authority, and a teaching professor allow
him entry into that group. The seemingly blind adherence to their
certitude that they "know" the truth about something and that
everyone else is stupid. I happen to agree that the objective
scientific method is as good as we've got, but I'm also willing to
acknowledge that there is stuff that is not (currently or possibly
ever) understandable to our puny human brains.

Where many men of science seem to lose their position, in my mind, is
when they start to stamp their feet about other's stupidity. They
start to sound as immature, pedantic, and deluded as those that they
denigrate. I think it's one of the reasons that such a large part of
society is seemingly distrustful of people who are "too intelligent"
or are disdainful of "nerds".

When Dan says that he considers this ridiculous crank "akin to a
Muslim terrorist" and that he will be "going for his throat", he
comes across as 1) way too serious, 2) an intolerant bully. Do you
need to sit in "timeout" until you get your emotions under control?
How about a nice glass of juice?

My recollection, foggy as it is over the 3 years I've monitored this
list, is that Dan likes to feel "needed" on the list and has taken
his ball and gone home at least one other time. For those who will
mourn the loss, I'm sorry he behaves this way. Be patient, he'll
calm down and be back in a while.

Oh, and while I'm wanking, all you people who fill the list with
quoted responses without editing them down: YOU'RE ON MY LIST TOO!

ROTFL

Gil

--
Gil Guerrero
gilster@-----.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------