Subject: Re: Understanding Erik Naggum From: Erik Naggum <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: 08 Oct 2002 15:09:22 +0000 Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <email@example.com> * "Coby Beck" <firstname.lastname@example.org> | But the undeniable fact (though some may deny it ;) is that his strategy | results in uneeded, counter-productive garbage. That is simply false. You simply do not see it when it does not develop in that direction. You, too, must feel that that which you do not see, cannot exist. | Erik is firmly convinced he is correct in what he does, no amount of | debating will change that. The evidence is that scores of people come back to me, sometimes years after their scolding, and tell me that it was extremely valuable to them, albeit painful at the time. They do not generally post this to the same forum so stupid feel-good people can get some counter-information, however. Of the people who have been rebuked for their arrogance or ignorance, only a tiny fraction (I keep track: it is about 5%) appear to be permanently damaged. The rest win big, if not there and then, then later in life. The perhaps most fascinating thing about you feel-good guys is that you actually believe that other people are unable to adjust to the feedback they receive, probably because you are yourself completely inept at that process. I mean, look at all these morons who return to repeat the same stupid, non-working argument that got them into trouble previously. How could I /not/ conclude that these people are permanently dysfunctional who cannot even produce variations on their theme. Other people are not as bad as you are, and therefore do not respond the way you do or do not. | As you have seen, no matter how calm and logical you are, if you don't | accept his arguments the discussion deteriorates quickly. *sigh* This is the kind of misguided notion that you will keep harping on despite the sheer absence of evidence, and when I counter this claim, you only think you have proven it. You feel-good guys are impossible to argue with, because disagreement makes you feel not-good and therefore you go bananas when I do not accept your version of things, especially where your stupid feelings are concerned. I find it extremely annoying. | You'll have to be content with expressing your view and recognizing a | dead end discussion... I find you one of the most unspeakably condescending persons I have ever had the displeasure of dealing with, Coby Beck. Your style is to presume to speak ex cathedra about someone else, as if you knew them like a childhood friend, their parents, or perhaps their shrink. That you do not even understand that this causes people to become angry at you only speaks volumes about your inability to feel any actual empathy with other people, despite all your self-serving crap about being nice. You are a bad person who has learned, probably the hard way from people realizing just what and who you are, that it serves you better to use a more polite and nicer language. It does not take X-ray vision to see through the wrapping, but people have to pay attention to what you are actually communicating to see how fantastically vile you really are beneath the "please, I'm harmless" language. The worst part is that most people who only want others to speak nicely are the same kind of evil people who hope that nobody will notice what they really are if they are polite and nice to people. Some /do/ notice, however. -- Erik Naggum, Oslo, Norway Act from reason, and failure makes you rethink and study harder. Act from faith, and failure makes you blame someone and push harder.