3 ms·

You have now officially "jumped the shark" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumping_the_shark https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumping_the_shark). I am not doing an

You have now officially "jumped the shark" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumping_the_shark https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumping_the_shark). I am not doing any backpedaling whatever but unraveling your comments point-by-point and showing up your ignorance of Boehm's work/significance throughout. Also am pointing out your sneaky way of twisting/misrepresenting my words into something which was never said. You are now throwing everything and the kitchen sink in to a mass of incoherent text with no unifying thread and not related to what we started with. This is merely more useless "Gish Gallop" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop). If you want a discussion on different topics submit a new thread and have people participate. As mentioned previously, You have presented no evidence from any source but merely your opinions which amount to nothing in the absence of knowledge of Boehm's work. You are making up your own laughable stories about what Dijkstra/Others thought about Boehm/his work and vice-versa with no evidence to back up any of it. Your imagination seems to be working overtime to argue some point of your own making none of which are tenable. I sincerely suggest that you heed the advice in the last para of my previous comment and take a break.

kragen 3y ago
if you take the time to think about what i wrote you'll see that none of that is true. the reason this has been a waste of my time is that you're so stuck in ego-defense mode that you can't even recognize a comprehensive and well-organized rebuttal when it hits you in the face
- rramadass 3y ago
  No it is you who is trying to reflect your faults in this thread on to me. I had already pointed out that you have been engaging in "Arguing for the sake of argument" which is a polite way of saying you are stuck on your "ego-defense" when you had clearly no idea of the original specific topic we started out with. I also hinted at this when i had said "A little humility goes a long way". Again, as mentioned previously, You really need to introspect on how you communicate with others particularly on subjects you are not knowledgeable on. There is much to learn in this world and while it takes a long time and effort to build a good reputation it takes merely an instant to lose it all.

kragen 3y ago

if you take the time to think about what i wrote you'll see that none of that is true. the reason this has been a waste of my time is that you're so stuck in ego-defense mode that you can't even recognize a comprehensive and well-organized rebuttal when it hits you in the face

rramadass 3y ago
No it is you who is trying to reflect your faults in this thread on to me. I had already pointed out that you have been engaging in "Arguing for the sake of argument" which is a polite way of saying you are stuck on your "ego-defense" when you had clearly no idea of the original specific topic we started out with. I also hinted at this when i had said "A little humility goes a long way". Again, as mentioned previously, You really need to introspect on how you communicate with others particularly on subjects you are not knowledgeable on. There is much to learn in this world and while it takes a long time and effort to build a good reputation it takes merely an instant to lose it all.