For the benefit of any thread reader who's made it this far but wisely refrained from reading Eric's and my exchange in all its grisly detail, I can't resist pointing out that Eric has just confessed that he willfully derailed this thread because he was in the mood to bitch at me about (among other things) the fact that I allegedly derail threads.
That's your real issue, Eric. Let's face it.
I "even have" articles in the forum wiki? Does that make me uppity or something?
I don't really see why it matters, but just for the record, since you mentioned them, turning several of my posts into forum wiki articles was something that the powers that be did on their own initiative, without any suggestion (or input) from me.
If you want less condescension directed at you, you should up your standards — and I've been able to offer multiple justifications for that recommendation just based on your posts in this thread.
It's been quite a performance, Eric. And as I noted earlier, I think disrespectful is an apt characterization of way too many of your posts — disrespectful both to me, and to anyone else who takes the time to read them with the expectation that you'll be making a good faith effort to fairly characterize the facts, and to read and understand the sources you're either citing as support or purporting to debate.
I'd say I have a much better handle than you do on what I have and haven't done with my MBTI forum posts. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with the fact that some of them have "influenced others," and to the extent that that's true, I'd respectfully suggest that one of the main reasons is that I consistently and conscientiously — are you ready for the reprise? — make a good faith effort to fairly characterize the facts, and to read and understand the sources I'm either citing as support or purporting to debate.
I thought about sending you a framed picture of me to hang on your wall for inspiration, but alas, if I did that, it might assist you in unmasking my true Reyniersian identity.
And that's your problem. You presume you're on some higher ground, talking about "up your standards". You ignore the horribly disrespectful behavior this crusade of yours led you to launch at a real expert who was here. I don't see how you can in good conscience even hurl that term at someone else.
But it's incredibly hard to digest your posts, loaded with all of these snarky little barbs whose language are obviously designed to irk and provoke. "Oh noes!! Not that!!" "It's been quite a performance, Eric." And that silly last sentence. And me just misunderstanding this stuff is "disrespectful" on the level of
all of this?
You sound like someone completely full of himself, like you're King Knowledge or something and it is hard to deal with people like that. (So of course it will come out in the way you "characterize the facts", and this
presuming you are even handling the facts correctly, and
everyone else is wrong, so their beliefs are everything up to "horseshit").
This has set the tone for these discussions (and making them
very easy to potentially, unwittingly be derailed, and it was really
this post that began to push this into an ad-hominen "me vs you" thing)!
So you can't blame the condescension all on me, because you
started out aiming stuff like this at "the HaroldGrantians" (and
especially Nardi, directly, eventually), and as I said, it got very tired very fast.
By your third post on my thread you linked to (#6), you were already starting with the "horseshit"! Way back then;
four years ago, already; that's how long you've been at this! And I had not disrespected or mischaracterized you in any way at that point. (And it's not just about my threads; there were several others right after this, and I remember telling you in one of them "OK, already, we see how you feel about this" or something like that. And the point of mentioning the wiki is not who put it up, or that it was wrong to put it up, but that it was already up, so this "information" you were flooding the environment with is already quite available).
You again really can not see how that is inflammatory (and
unnecessary, and even
distracting), to a person who believes in what you're attacking. (And it's NOT how to go about being "understood", or taken seriously! But instead of looking at this, just try to prove I do the same things, and it doesn't come anywhere near matching up). I think I had been
very patient with this all this time.
You are in total
denial! You need to own up to some stuff for a change. (You know so much; ever heard of the "Johari Window"?)
Again, I greatly apologize to [MENTION=33869]Turi[/MENTION], and no, it's not directly an "anti-Grant thread", but you were saying some of the same things, so I felt the need to defend the Grant Model, and didn't think it would go this way.