[Sigia-l] Professional Integrity (RE: data as information?)

[Ted Han]

Again, i'm not sure what side of this i'm on, so i hope you'll
understand that it's not out of some desire to seek vengence against
those who "exposed one's achilles' heel" that i am accusing you of
trolling, but out of the fact that you genuinely are trolling.

I find painting your opponents in an argument as intellectually
dishonest when they've made a good faith effort to put forward a case
is either horribly immature, or severely hypocritical (maybe both).

Could you lay off the character assassination?

-T

On 6/30/05, Boniface Lau <boniface_lau at compuserve.com> wrote:
> 
> > From: Peter Merholz
> >
> > Because, you condescending person [<--not my first choice of words],
> 
> I can understand the uneasy feeling when one's Achilles heel is
> exposed. But that is not being condescended to.
> 
> 
> > you don't bother to quote or cite where in the list archive you've
> > witnessed this.
> 
> Because no one had asked for it. Now that you ask, an obvious starting
> point is the thread "Data vs. Information".
> 
> 
> > You instead attempt to stand upon a pedestal of superiority,
> > spewing your destructive commentary, instead of seeking to inform
> > others of how folks have failed to make this distinction.
> 
> I have been informing others to the degree of detail that they had
> asked for. For example, when someone asked for the support of my
> assertion, I gave my reasoning as a form of support.
> 
> 
> >
> > But, really, it's your tone of smug rightness, backed by no DATA
> > <ha! > whatsoever, that pisses people off.
> 
> The DATA is the _absence_ of a way that IAs use to pragmatically
> distinguish information from data.
> 
> What really pissed people off is the exposure of Achilles heel, i.e.
> although IAs claim that information is not data, they cannot
> pragmatically distinguish information from data. Thus, IAs are being
> forced to treat data as information. They are not walking their talk.
> 
> When an argument says there is none, the obvious way to refute it is
> to show one. Thus, to refute my argument, all that people have to do
> is pointing to one way that IAs are using to pragmatically distinguish
> information from data. But no one did that.
> 
> Instead, people complained about the lack of quote or citation. That
> is barking up the wrong tree.
> 
> 
> >
> > Please either contribute to the community, or leave.
> 
> I happen to believe that professional integrity ("walking the talk")
> is an important fundamental issue, albeit uncomfortable to some.
> 
> 
> Boniface
> 
> ------------
> When replying, please *trim your post* as much as possible.
> *Plain text, please; NO Attachments
> 
> Searchable Archive at http://www.info-arch.org/lists/sigia-l/
> 
> IA 06 Summit.  Mark your calendar.  March 23-27, Vancouver, BC
> 
> 
> ________________________________________
> Sigia-l mailing list -- post to: Sigia-l at asis.org
> Changes to subscription: http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigia-l
>