Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
First you complain that I linked to a blog post, and then you regurgitate the entire post here (presumably thinking that there were a whole host of board regulars who, like yourself, become addled by working those link thingies that keep cropping up in hypertext documents). Were you dropped on your head a lot as an infant?
|
I posted the whole Blog, because I knew most of the experienced and savvy posters would have ignored the link. I wanted to make sure they didn't miss what a load of B.S. the actual post was; that it was infinitely more pathetic than they probably even expected.
Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
The poster, Mark Kleiman, is a professor of public policy at UCLA. Which is to say that his credentials to say shit about educational policy are substantially greater than yours.
|
You blabber on about his credentials, however, mentioning that someone is a professor of public policy or a professor of sociology, actually diminishes their credibility to most thoughtful people. And as usual, you don't go to the actual substance of what he says, you just rely on his credentials. Maybe you might consider looking at the validity of their arguments, instead of their credentials, when judging whether or not their arguments have value. However, being that you are the king of fallacies, I guess that is why you like Blogs so much.
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop Slagging what he says simply because he's published it on a blog instead of printing it on paper is just dumb. (Congratulations: You walked into that one.) Compared to your ouevre here on this particular subject, his post compares favorably.
|
Slagging? Is that a Bloggers term? I criticized it because it was bad, not because it was on a blog. In fact, I pointed out that most of the stuff in the link was even worse than most stuff usually posted to blogs. I actually complimented blogs in that they usual contain stuff that is more credible than what you presented us with.
I notice you are still are not defending the Blog post. The whole Blog is there, just highlight for me the sections you found so compelling that you felt the entire board should review it? It all seemed like a bunch of unsubstantiated B.S. to me, but clearly you thought some part of it has some value because you wanted to share it with the whole board. What part would that be?
