Jan 17, 2007, 2:19 AM
Post #352 of 764
Re: [jargreen] Don't yell at me, but...
[In reply to]
All I can suggest is that you review the thread. For eight days after I posted The Kealey Scale, things weren't particularly heated. As late as January 8th I was telling Clench I didn't think the Kealey ratings were necessarily correct, that "maybe I'm right, maybe you are, maybe we both are [shrug]," and Clench hadn't yet said I was "avoiding" any issues but that we should "agree to disagree." That's not so bad, right? Then Hopper joined the discussion:
"Clench has stated about a zillion times on the boards that he goes to Columbia and that he things it is an excellent program. Second, this argument is ridiculous....The rankings that you have come up with are also severely problematic. Any ranking scale that doesn't put Iowa in, at the very least, the top five, is not based in reality....And frankly, umass76, I've mostly stayed out of this because any time anybody has been critical of your ranking scale, you've gone into total defensive mode and have not particularly been open to any arguments about it."
Well, the fact is, the thread hadn't been heated up to that point, it was just spirited debate. Hopper's comment was a blind-side and it changed the tone of things.
Then I inadvertantly set Clench off (I honestly couldn't recall if he went to Columbia, not being a regular of the board, and he thought I was asking him if he did as some sort of prank or joke). Hopper meanwhile continued to bang the drum no one else was banging to the effect that I "wouldn't listen" to anyone:
"...we all know you put a lot of time in, and that's appreciated, but the problem is that your reactions are usually precipitate and though verbose and well-written, tend to indicate that you are not actually considering challenges to your ranking system....often when you are the only person defending something, it means you are wrong. And tone begets tone....here's the basic problem, umass76: you've spent a whole bunch of time making this ranking system, and because of it, you are defending it--and its results--regardless of what other people say...but whatever. One of the reasons I've mostly stayed out of this is because I don't really care. I already made my choice."
The new tone of the conversation was coming from Hopper, and no one but him/her had yet made the attack on me that "you just won't listen...". Even Hopper admitted he/she was starting stuff with me: "By the way, umass76, I'm not trying to attack you, though I'm sure I sound churlish in parts." Gussy and Fear&Loathing came to my defense and said "cut the guy some slack..."
Then we got this from Clench: "I think you are being quite disingenuous...." January 8th, 5:25PM; and, "I'm afraid I gotta go with Hopper on this one. I don't see how you've really responded to most of the criticisms listed," January 8th, 11:23PM. And we were off to the races. Two ganging up on one. Classic. Except it was quickly three ganging up on one (bighark: "Umass, you need to drop this. Your Kealey Scale is based of the opinion of one guy. That's it. That's pretty weak"). I didn't ratchet up the rhetoric, Ryan. What I got, in fact, was the classic "public shaming" for things I hadn't actually done; consider this, from Clench:
"Can't say as I buy the 'Jimmy did it first!' defense. It didn't work with my mom when I was a kid and it soured me on the idea. I'm not sure I read the 'initial attack,' I don't visit this site every day, but just because someone initially attacked you four pages ago doesn't give you license to attack every other poster in this thread."
Huh? That was out of nowhere; my beef was with (and only with) the three folks who had ganged up on me because they didn't like TKS: Hopper, Clench, and Hark. So this notion I'd been practically physically abusing folks since December 31st was, and still is, just unfair. My feeling is, if you hate these new rankings, just ignore them. There's no need to attack me over them, as--and I'll admit this--I do respond if attacked (and certainly did, when it happened).
(This post was edited by umass76 on Jan 17, 2007, 2:22 AM)