Ed, you apparently have never had children that continually ask "why". Why do you exist? Because it is obvious that you exist, you would not be standing here talking to me if you did not exist. "Why?" Well, because you first have to exist before you can talk. "Why?" Because otherwise you wouldn't have vocal cords. "But why?"
And no Ed, I am not calling you a child, I am saying that you are acting like a child. Anyone can argue with anything as long as they deny the obvious. I can argue over my own existence and nobody will be able to prove that I exist as long as I want to deny the obvious fact that I exist. This is what you are doing and while you can deny the obvious, it does not mean that the obvious is not true, that you and I both exist and that the IT industry either regulates itself or will be regulated by government. Guess what? I know people that have never used an Auctioneer, but guess what? The Ohio Revised Code has explicit laws and regulations regarding the "Auctioneer" occupation. I know certain hippies that have never gotten a haircut. Guess what? The Ohio Revised Code has extensive laws and regulations regarding the "Barber" occupation. There are also laws and regulations for... "Architects", "Attorneys", "Cosmetologists", "Dentists", "Embalmers", "Telephone Solicitors", "Innkeepers", "Nurses", "Pawnbrokers", "Precious Metal Dealers", "Chiropractors", "Real Estate Brokers", "Plumbers", "Sanitarians", "Secondhand Dealers; Junk Yards", "Motor Vehicle Salvage", "Hearing Aid Dealers", Private Investigators", "Speech-Language Pathologists" ...just to name a few > In one breath, you claim that you're all about "facts and logic". But in > the next breath, you admit that you can't "prove the obvious". The two > statements, at least to me, are incompatible. What I draw from those two > statements is that you have opinions you consider to be fact, and are > incapable of proving them. The easiest proof, in your mind, is to call them > "obvious" and walk away, which, of course, proves nothing. > > More comments inline. > > In summary, Greg, I think you ought to seek professional help. > > Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP > Freelance E-Mail Philosopher > Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler > Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 7:44 AM > To: Exchange Discussions > Subject: RE: Migrating from GroupWise 6.5 > > First, I never said I was a "master logician". This is simply another in a > long line of dozens of mischaracterizations of my posts that proves the fact > that you either cannot read, cannot comprehend what you read, choose to > embelish what you read or assume things about what you read. What I said was > that I stick to the facts and logic, not that I am a "master logician" > > >>> See above. > > Second, philosophers have been arguing over "existence" for a long, long > time now. And the fact that I exist is pretty evident and obvious to me at > least. > > >>> Well, I'm glad you got that off your chest. Perhaps you might care to > explain its relevance to this discussion. > > Finally, I really have no interest in proving the obvious to you or anyone > else. > > >>> Then you have no grounds assert that what you say is grounded in facts > and logic. So I am free to argue that everything you say is grounded in hot > air. > > It is obvious > > >>> To whom? > > that computers and technology have become critically important components > of everyone's daily lives. > > >>> I know at least one person who has no computer and derives very little > benefit from them. So your point is wrong. > > It is obvious > > >>> To whom? > > that the entire recorded history of occupations and public welfare laws in > the United States points to the fact that as an occupation becomes > increasingly important to the public welfare that licensing and other laws > are passed to regulate it's behavior. > > >>> That would be "its". Again, obvious to whom? > > It is obvious > > >>> To whom? > > that without self-regulation that these laws will likely be passed by state > governments and could be quite restricting and quite harsh. > > >>> This is conjecture, not facts or even logic. > > It is obvious that because of the computer industry's rather libertarian > bent > > >>> Deckler's rule #53 for arguing: When you can't prove something, give it > a label that has all sorts of connotations. Yeah, Microsoft is real > libertarian. This supposition shows just how little about computers and the > computer industry you really understand. > > that we, as independent computer consultants and professionals, have no > single voice with which to speak in order to combat laws and regulations > that others would pass to regulate us. > > >>> Personally, being that I am a member, the Computer Society of the > Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers speaks for me. I do not > interpret its standards of ethics to read that accepting a small gratuity > from a partner company to be a massive conflict of interest. Sorry to bring > this argument back on topic, but I felt that you're wandering off in some > other direction. > > It is obvious > > >>> Again, obvious to whom? > > that with self-regulation comes less of a need for government to pass laws > and regulations hence keeping government off our backs. > > >>> So, accepting a small gratuity from a partner vendor will cause the > government to over-regulate the computer industry? Wow! I never realized > the implications. I shall resign my MVP status at once to save the > industry! > > Yes Ed, it is obvious > > >>> To whom? > > that I sit back in my chair with a nice smug smirk plastered right across my > face > > >>> You always have that smug smirk. > > because I know that if you don't like MY ethics, > > >>> This implies that all of this is obvious to you. Is that what you mean? > It isn't obvious to me. Is it obvious to anyone else who might still be > reading this thread at this point? > > boy are you going to hate the ethics imposed upon you by government. > > >>> Oh my god! Now I'm resigning my MVP status for the good of the country! > Maybe I can get some sort of medal for this. > > It makes me laugh so hard that because you and others like you will not even > admit to a simple, obvious, conflict of interest that you have doomed > EVERYONE in IT to ever increasing government regulation. > > >>> You really believe this? > > Why do I laugh? > > >>> Because you're insane? > > Shouldn't I care because I am in IT as well? I laugh because I don't care. > I'll find something else to do. I am no crusader and Ed, frankly, people > like you are not worth crusading for. In fact, you; in particular Ed, > DESERVE to be regulated by the goverment. > > >>> In other words, we're all damned to hell, but you'll go to heaven. > Greg, you're in the wrong profession. You should be preaching > fire-and-brimstone to those who care. Maybe you ought to be a cult leader > or something. Well, you kind of are already; you're the leader of a cult of > one. > > No, I cannot prove, > > >>> Duh. > > or simply choose not to do all the work to prove, > > >>> The former. > > the obvious. > > >>> When it's so obvious to you, why isn't it obvious to everyone else? > Because you're living in a fantasy world. To you, this is all right out of > The Twilight Zone. Greg, you might be a couple of steps away from a padded > cell. > > I cannot prove that an apple is red or that the sky is blue or that we live > on a planet that orbits a sun. > > >>> Pity. > > I also cannot prove that either we regulate ourselves or someone else will > do it for us. > > >>> Duh. > > But, just because I cannot prove it does not mean that it is not true or a > fact of life. > > >>> What you have failed to do throughout this less-than-brilliant treatise > is to explain how accepting a small gift from a partner vendor will send the > entire computer industry into ruin. You argue about the whole general > ethics thing, but you haven't yet proven that this particular thing about > MVP is, in fact, unethical. Your entire argument has been, "It's unethical > because I say it is." Well, that is neither logical nor factual. > > > "I cannot prove the obvious." > > > > Then, contrary to your prior assertions, you are hardly a master logician. > > > > "If you are not willing to accept the obvious, then I will never be > > able to prove anything to you." > > > > As I recall from my schooling in mathematics, even the obvious must be > > proved. Just because something is obvious to you doesn't mean that it > > is a truth. Mr. Deckler, I assert that much of what is obvious truth > > to your mind is not truth in the rest of the world's reality. > > > > Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP > > Freelance E-Mail Philosopher > > Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Deckler > > Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 6:19 PM > > To: Exchange Discussions > > Subject: RE: Migrating from GroupWise 6.5 > > > > Yes, you are correct Ed. I cannot prove the obvious. I cannot prove > > that an apple is red or that the sky is blue or that you live on the > > planet that orbits a sun. If you are not willing to accept the > > obvious, then I will never be able to prove anything to you. > > > > > Likewise, and more importantly sinc, you haven't proven your > > > statement > > true. > > > It is only a "real or perceived" conflict of interest in your own > > > mind. You haven't proven anything beyond that. > > > > > > Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP > > > Freelance E-Mail Philosopher > > > Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > > Web Interface: > > http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode > > =&lang > > =english > > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _________________________________________________________________ > List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm > Web Interface: > http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang > =english > To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchange&text_mode=&lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
