He is of the higher school of discussion.
As I am avoiding partaking in debates on forums and blogs, I have one old discussion I need to end once and for all.
Being Norwegian I am probably a lot more direct and honest than most people coming from a common wealth country. My honesty and directness can possibly be interpreted as rudeness as I do not sugarcoat the truth, facts or my opinions; I just say it like it is and how I see it.
This tend to annoy some people so much they become extremely rude; and so frustrated, while they are being rude, that they tell me to not be so rude.
Oh the irony.
I came across two, as I see it, poorly written, researched, formatted and updated blog posts[1] articles. Without hesitation I just had to give my two cents, and question the reasoning behind these two posts[2] articles.
In all fairness, looking at other approved comments, I thought the guy could handle my style of writing and criticism.
I could not be more wrong.
He started lecturing me about his opinions, which is fine; but even if I tend to be very direct I prefer to make people know that an opinion is an opinion, not a fact.
So I kind of tried to give him some, in sarcastic way, friendly advice; sprinkled with some tongue in cheek banter.
The last comment made me write the following comment to at least end the debate on his blog:
Thank you for the laughs. :)
I re-wrote a possible comeback several times, but I saw no reason to go into a debate about semantics with this guy. I will instead reply to his last comment here in the following paragraphs.
His comments are quoted and numbered; followed by my replies.
1. I am a customer who has paid them no money but supplied them with tons of free content.
Maybe I should spend rest of the year picking up rubbish in the streets of Brisbane for free everyday; and later on demand to have a veto vote on all decisions Brisbane City Council makes.
Or if I do volunteer work I demand to have them do as I say, because I did supply them with tons of free labour.
I guess you understand where I am coming from and how his statement is flawed. Just because you provide something for free do not give you the right to demand something in return.
2. Again you are being repetitive and off-topic. These are all matters that were discussed in my blog post and comments about why the rubber stamp retweet is not actually a retweet at all.
3. Again you are off-topic. If you want to debate the merits of the pseudo-retweet vs. traditional retweet, go to the blog post devoted to that subject, and do it there.
Pot and kettle?
I was not aware that this guy is the authority who decides what a true retweet is. Good to know tho.
Also must be confusing if I reference other posts, he references, in his post…………
In my previous reply I actually provided him with some sources to where he could find more information regarding Twitter and their API; he obviously did not like that I was trying to do some research for him.
4. I am of the school that higher level discussions, and a greater sense of comraderie, are produced by eliminating rudeness and cheap shots; the track record of the commenters on my Recording Industry vs The People blog has proved that.
In other words, it is perfectly fine for him to make assumptions about Twitter and call their assumed actions pathetic, but when I start to question his reasoning I am the one that is being rude; and apparently I am using cheap shots.
I don’t understand the “vague” point you are making.
If you’re saying I made a mistake, you should identify the mistake.
Pot and kettle, again? I have been deliberately vague to prove my point that his skills in research is a mess, as he has no clue what I am pointing out. He did one mistake, which he corrected later on; or at least that I bothered to fact check.
I get the impression that this person lives by the ‘do as I say, not as I do’ rule when it comes to debating with him. Apparently he can not handle someone questioning his reasoning and researching skills. He is a perfect example of someone who is a hypocrite. It is perfectly fine for him to accuse someone, but shame on anyone trying to accuse him of something.
I guess he is unable to stop thinking as an attorney, and thinks he is on trial or something; defending himself as it was a matter of life or death.
When I looked him up on Wikipedia I was shocked to learn that he is a member of EFF; and his name is Ray Beckerman. Hopefully he is just a supporting member, because I can honestly not see how this is good PR for EFF; having someone onboard that acts like this guy.
I have met a lot of arseholes online, but I have always tried to keep my cool as I know you will be judged by what you post online.
As I have said before; if you are willing to post your opinions online, you have to be ready to defend them.
