![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Bernard Polishuk, mensch
Feb. 13th, 2008 06:57 amThis is one of those donor tiles, in this instance outside the public library in Redmond, WA. I've always liked the forthrightness of it. I should be so lucky.
Feb. 13th, 2008
Pulled up from comments
Feb. 13th, 2008 07:22 pmLike Harry Chapin used to say, "The excitement continues to build."
Mr. Altucher replies, in a thread on my recent post. He's in italics this time.
*^*^*^*
"the fact remains that your stats have nothing to do with my article."
You make a statistical claim -- that, "There's no way," an investment of a certain amount of money will see a return. You do not support this claim from any source. When evidence is presented from a reputable source that your claim is factually incorrect, you then say that the evidence is irrelevant.
This is somewhat like saying that the sound barrier will never be broken, and no one should waste their time investing in such tomfoolery. When an eyewitness report from Chuck Yeager is brought in, you deem it to be irrelevant.
"Then you decide to get personal in order to make your point."
You wrote your article in personal terms. Using the Winer Defense (if one comments on the personal aspects, it's business; if one comments on the business aspects, it's personal) is only either a) an intentional evasion on your part, or b) an unintentional failure to recognize just how personal your own writing is, and then failing to acknowledge the consequences.
Mr. Altucher replies, in a thread on my recent post. He's in italics this time.
*^*^*^*
"the fact remains that your stats have nothing to do with my article."
You make a statistical claim -- that, "There's no way," an investment of a certain amount of money will see a return. You do not support this claim from any source. When evidence is presented from a reputable source that your claim is factually incorrect, you then say that the evidence is irrelevant.
This is somewhat like saying that the sound barrier will never be broken, and no one should waste their time investing in such tomfoolery. When an eyewitness report from Chuck Yeager is brought in, you deem it to be irrelevant.
"Then you decide to get personal in order to make your point."
You wrote your article in personal terms. Using the Winer Defense (if one comments on the personal aspects, it's business; if one comments on the business aspects, it's personal) is only either a) an intentional evasion on your part, or b) an unintentional failure to recognize just how personal your own writing is, and then failing to acknowledge the consequences.