In a recent
posting I included a dbForums
exchange between r937 and Ravi, and the following comments:
Ed. Comment: In
this context, consider that that one of the discussants in the following thread
at dbForums is american, the other indian. If you ever wondered why the center
of power is shifting from the West to the East, one of the reasons is in there
somewhere, in Gates’, Stonebraker’s and r937’s utterings.
It's interesting that the likes of r937 are always silent
when others point blank insult me using foul language, while failing to provide
any content whatsoever, but my personal preference not to deal with Celko, for
example, based on substantive evidence we provided over the years to back this
up (for just recent examples see There’s Only One Relational
Model, (Not)
More on Celko Please!, and On an Old Celko Puzzle),
bothers him. One reason is because he has no clue about substance—no wonder, given
his authority source for database knowledge: corporations—and therefore can
only interact with style: he is concerned with my style, but cannot appreciate,
and therefore is oblivious to, the damage that Celko causes.
r937 reacted to it as follows:
notice that "Ed" does not miss an opportunity to
insult me ("no clue"). also, how could he say one of us is american
and the other indian? we're both from canada, and neither one of us is hiding
the fact!!! what a blooming idiot.
I do not recall other opportunities “I did not miss to insult
him”, but apparently it is OK for him to call me a “blooming idiot”, but not OK
for me to state the demonstrable fact that he does not know what he’s
talking about; for if he had any clue, he would not have insisted, without
proof, what he did in the exchange—not only that Access and MySQL are DBMSs,
but relational to boot, which is patently false. Indeed, when pressed to
justify his claim, r937 never did.
It is reality that insults, not me, I just expose it.
Incidentally, I dare anybody to provide any evidence that I ever used foul language of the sort used by r937!
My mistake about nationalities is not as consequential as
r937 tries to make it, to distract from the real issue. As Ravi points out
later in the exchange, what I meant (and should have said) is that one is of
north-american, and the other of east-asian extraction. The US do not have a
monopoly over disregard of knowledge and reason, which is increasingly becoming
a western, not just north-american posture (see the several postings on the
European situation); it’s actually the cultural origin, not the
nationality, that makes the difference.
For the likes of r937 it is idiocy to make such a minor error about nationality, but not to make false technical statements that make ignorance obvious. Based on that alone the reader should be able to judge who is the blooming idiot here.
Posted 5/13/2005
