Quote Originally Posted by Ed Sukach
Quote Originally Posted by Donald Miller


Thank you for sharing this quote.
It seems to me and to others that have messaged me offpost that you seem to have taken it upon yourself to project another meaning to my posts on the subject of the objective and the abstract. That by literal interpertation of your posts on this subject it seems that you are indicating that I have intellectualized this matter. Nothing could be further from the truth. It seems that those who have contacted me privately have no difficulty in understanding what I have said. That leaves me to wonder why it is that you have difficulty in understanding what I have said.

Would you have me utter sounds like "duh", or "but", or "geez" and try to communicate in that manner?

It might be interesting for you to reread what this thread has indicated with an impartial and open mind.
Good luck.
INTERESTING!!!! *I* have misunderstood your writing - and ... I'm trying to "project another meaning to your posts"?. I'll say it once: NO - I am not trying to " project" ANYTHING ... I have NO desire to adulterate the meaning of anyone else's posts here. Why the hell should I? Is there something to be gained if I do?

"Others" have PM'ed you offline to make you aware of this - or condemn(??) me?
I have an idea ... why not forward those to where they'll do the most good - to me.
I'll be most receptive to them ... I do not wish to offend anyone ... although a verbal "kick in the slats", might do both of us some good, once in a while.
But then again - I would be able to respond - as it stands now I cannot - I don't know who they were.- OR wht they've said.
My last couple of posts were not intended to be "directed" at anyone ... Please remember that I wrote that "I was not trying to refute your viewpoint ... only state - restate - clarify - mine.

"Duh", "but", "geez" - go ahead and use them - if you feel that they will help me - or anyone else to understand. I feel that "Standard" English is somewhat deficient, anyway, especially when it comes to uses descriptive of highly esoteric principles. We steal words from Greek, Latin, Old English, Same, Farsi, Ojibway ... whatever Helps. If common slang, or a particular idiom is of use ... I say, "Use it!!", with my blessings.

When it comes to "understanding" - I once had a *very skilled Management Teacher say this: If you ar trying to describe something (his interest was the rationals behind starting a business) write it on the back of one of your business cards. If you can do that - *YOU* understand it. If not - keep thinking - you really do not know what you are doing.
From the back of one of mine - applicable here, "There is *NO* "perfect" way. It is useful to study the ways of others - but we will NOT necessarily agree with them".

I will confess to a twinge of the idea that you were motivated by the idea of, "What I am writing is "prima facie" evidence." - and therefore - cannot be contested. There can be only one factor leading to disagreement: Those who will disagree simply DO NOT UNDERSTAND."

Maybe I don't. That to me id less important than getting the idea across that we are all individuals, and entitled - *bound* to seek or own paths / philosophies.

Tell me one thing - did you expect me to slink away in silence - terrified of the "off-line" PM's that I might provoke?

Please forgive my frank and clear communication that follows. I try to usually use more tactful presentation. However sometimes one needs to communicate in the language that the other person understands. Thus this follows:

I will not enter into a disagreeable discussion with you because it is apparent to me and to others that you have taken it upon yourself to interject and project something into this discussion of your choosing and not pertinant to the matter upon which this thread is/was based. The words that one of our members used to describe this was "Ed Sukach's insertion of the red herring of intellect". They went on to say "I don't understand how you have patience with someone who does that". I will not violate that members name because that was a private communication to me. I will say though that my patience with you is really wearing very, very, thin.

I wish that in the future that you would try to keep things more on the track upon which the thread is/was based. I realize that this must be difficult for you since you have failed repeatedly to do so in this case.

It is readily apparent that your statement of your last couple of posts not being directed to anyone is an inaccurate statement since the record of your posts stand as they were entered. My name is clearly on one of those posts as the person to whom it was directed.

So my response to you is this. I wish no further communication with you on this matter. Should you persist then I will take the appropriate indicated action.

Donald Miller