I give up, after many, many years!

In rec.aviation.student gatt wrote:
Michael Ash wrote:

As to whether "waving certificates" in people's faces adds value, it's
not much different than sourcing an official or authoritative reference,
is it? If we were talking about combat it would be relevant for the
readers to understand that the people in the discussion are a video game
geek versus a combat veteran.

It's relevant to the discussion, sure, when you present it as backing for
your opinion or for facts. But when you come straight out and shout
someone dow, saying that they're not allowed to disagree with you because
you have credentials and they don't, that's just bad taste.

Please tell me at what point I "came straight out and shouted somebody
down," and, more importantly, where I've EVER said they're "not allowed
to disagree" because I have credentials and they don't.

There was the bit which prompted my first message, where you said "DON'T
CONTRADICT ME. I FLY PLANES AND YOU PLAY VIDEO GAMES."

It's fine to disagree right up to the point where you're disagreeing
with virtually everybody from private pilots to airline pilots.

If this were rec.surgery.brain and some philosophy student was arguing
with brain surgeons all day, every day, and then admonishing them for
their answers, I wouldn't for a second expect the surgeons not to remind
the student they're they're doctors and that he's not qualified to
contradict literally ALL of them. (Not to mention ignoring their
authoritative references and dodging any challenge to cite sources for
him own information.)

I have no problem with occasionally reminding people of their
qualifications. But on the other hand, novices can be right and experts
can be wrong, so it's much better to argue based on the facts. If this
doesn't work because the person you're talking to is a flaming moron,
telling him to shut up and listen because you have experience or
credentials isn't likely to help.

But I never said anybody "wasn't allowed" to disagree with me simply
because of my credentials.

Well, you told him not to, same effect in the end.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

Michael Ash wrote:


There was the bit which prompted my first message, where you said "DON'T
CONTRADICT ME. I FLY PLANES AND YOU PLAY VIDEO GAMES."

That's has to do with the fact that he asked a valid question, I and
several other people answered it somewhat uniformly, and then he
proceeded to refute that answer in a different thread. (I'm not going to
look it up.)


But I never said anybody "wasn't allowed" to disagree with me simply
because of my credentials.

Well, you told him not to, same effect in the end.

Apparently not. He's still posting here, isn't he? I simply threw him
back into the killfile and will not answer any further questions he asks
unless he pays me for ground instruction.

If there's a problem with that, too bad, I guess. Choosing to ignore
all further questions he asks is entirely my decision. If he chooses to
spout bull**** in a student forum as if he was some sort of authority on
the matter, it's equally my right to illuminate the fact that he's a
fraud and that I'm not.

-c

In rec.aviation.student gatt wrote:
Michael Ash wrote:

There was the bit which prompted my first message, where you said "DON'T
CONTRADICT ME. I FLY PLANES AND YOU PLAY VIDEO GAMES."

That's has to do with the fact that he asked a valid question, I and
several other people answered it somewhat uniformly, and then he
proceeded to refute that answer in a different thread. (I'm not going to
look it up.)

I understand the context (and the sentiment behind it; really!) but I just
think that when it gets to this level it ends up being counterproductive.

But I never said anybody "wasn't allowed" to disagree with me simply
because of my credentials.

Well, you told him not to, same effect in the end.

Apparently not. He's still posting here, isn't he? I simply threw him
back into the killfile and will not answer any further questions he asks
unless he pays me for ground instruction.

If there's a problem with that, too bad, I guess. Choosing to ignore
all further questions he asks is entirely my decision. If he chooses to
spout bull**** in a student forum as if he was some sort of authority on
the matter, it's equally my right to illuminate the fact that he's a
fraud and that I'm not.

I think this is a good decision. Refuting him *can* be useful, but in my
opinion only until it reaches the point where he's obviously being
ridiculous, at which point you just have to let him be, because otherwise
you'll never reach the end of it. Killfiling him is a fine alternative,
though.

There's a great comic on this subject: http://xkcd.com/386/

Ultimately you have to just give up and let the troll be wrong.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon