Loose Ends

[Marc At]

Jerry,

Always a pleasure. Always nice to be called \"intellectually dishonest,\" by you, and have my viewpoints dismissed as \"crap.\"

I\'m going to post one last time on this subject, then beg off. There\'s a sequence of events-- directly tied to each other-- that have occurred recently and in the past:

1) T-graph partisan disses specific Ragozin numbers.

2) There\'s some prodding of Friedman (by those who are either not partisan at all or by those who are Ragozin partisans) for him to explain this specific number(s).

3) Many times, Friedman will respond. He\'ll post the numbers, briefly discuss the logic behind them, and the very few people who care who are Ragozin partisans are generally satisfied.

Here\'s where your expectations and mine start to differ...

4) Tgraph proprietor responds with an \"A-Ha!\" e-mail, which generally includes a series of further questions/accusations about the integrity of the Ragozin numbers. Some of these questions might even be interesting.

5) Either a Ragozin or Tgraph customer then encourages Friedman to continue the dialogue.

6) Friedman, at this point, throws up his hands and says, no enough is enough with this particular argument.

And I for one, don\'t blame him. If that makes me \"intellectually dishonest,\" so be it...

[TGJB]

Tell you what, Marc. We\'re going to move the smoking gun post up to the top of the board, where everyone can read it again and draw their own conclusions as to whether there were points that demanded an explanation from Friedman, what his failure to do so indicates, and what your explanations of his not doing so really indicate.

I don\'t characterize the behavior of Ragozin players as a matter of course. When they act in such fashion as to deserve it, I call them on it.