Following various exchanges with Curt Monash and my publication of Monash Balderdash debunking his nonsense, the publisher there posted Monash's Response to Pascal.

 

First, the title is misleading—as Monash himself admits in the opening paragraph, he addresses none of my challenges.

 

Vigorous debate is fine, but Fabian Pascal goes way too far when he fabricates non-existent ethical breaches on the part of those with whom he disagrees.  He should be deeply ashamed for spreading those stories of censorship, which are thoroughly debunked (good word) here.  Beyond that, I don’t like his discussion style in general, and have no intention of replying to him point by point. However, at Bob Seiner’s invitation, I’m happy to review the DBMS2 discussion for the TDAN.com readership. 

 

Yeah, right. It’s only because he “does not like my discussion style” that he has not ever addressed any of the substantive challenges not just by me, but by others too.

 

Second, when he wrote his reply, Monash knew full well that I did not spread any story of censorship. Just the opposite: somebody else made a mistake believing that Monash had the authority to edit his Computerworld blogs, and I pointed out that it was unlikely. Monash himself acknowledged my correction in one of his blog comments. So he simply lied when he accused me of “spreading those stories”, and for that it is he who should be ashamed (that notwithstanding, Monash does not exactly like criticism, particularly since, to the educated eye, they deserve ridicule. On several occasions he urged me essentially to desist from countering his claims, to “buzz off”).

 

Consider now his statement that he wrote his reply "at Bob Seiner’s invitation". It would be, of course, reasonable for you to interpret that to mean that Seiner, TDAN.com’s publisher, has contacted Monash and asked him to respond; which is clearly the impression that Monash wants to create. But now compare this to Seiner's version in his email to me:

 

For your information, I did not invite him to respond without him first coming to me with ComputerWorld and blasting me for publishing your column and asking for the opportunity.

 

Apparently, Monash wants the freedom to make unsubstantiated claims and accusations in a Computerworld column and blogs—he has called one detractor “dreck”, and declared me and Chris Date frauds based on information from undisclosed “sources”—but when substantive challenges to his absurd claims are published, they deserve blasting and demands for rebuttals. In other words, Monash is a substance-lacking, bullying liar.

 

But having interacted with Monash for a while, this is hardly surprising. I knew, not just Guessed Who and Where is the Fraud: deflecting from one’s own flaws by falsely accusing others of them is standard operating procedure for specimens such as Monash. The reader will have to judge what Monash is for herself/himself.

 

 

Posted 11/18/05