[EM] Russ and his pecking order

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

My mention of Russ and his degree was an incidenal part of a larger posting 
about voting system statements. But this posting that I´m replying to now is 
entirely about Russ´s brags, and his opinions of me. Again, Rob L., Russ is 
posting something that has no bearing on EM´s topic.

Russ said:

What amazes me about Mike is that he has no such humulity.

I reply:

Maybe not, but at least I can spell it.

Russ continues:

He has no concept of where he stands in the pecking order.

I reply:

What pecking order? And what, if any, relevance does your pecking order have 
to the question of how pretentious or ignorant your postings here are? Is it 
that you believe that a better position in some pecking order means that you 
can´t be said to be pretentous, not matter what ignorance you 
authoritatively expound?

Russ continues:

What is he -- a
friggin' janitor or something?

I reply:

Oh,  a litle of this, a little of that :-) Whatever I do, I work for a 
living, and I genuinely earn what I make, something that can´t be said for 
many people who have more than I do--and that includes many who are higher 
in your "pecking order".

My interest in voting systems results from the harm to society that is done 
by its lack of democracy. That harm isn´t to people high in the pecking 
order. It´s to people who are low in the pecking order. If I´m low in the 
pecking order, maybe that´s a good reason for me to prefer that there be a 
more democratic society.

But, in any case, it isn´t clear what pecking order position has to do with 
my statement that you´re proof that a degree is no guarantee agains 
pretentiious ignorance.

Russ continues:

Did he even finish high school?

I reply:

You´re obsessed with finding out personal information about me. Sorry, but 
you´ll just have to wonder. I´m not the proper topic of this mailing list.

Russ continued:

Apparently all that time I
was trying to help him get his ideas aired he imagined that he was the
grand master and I was his lowly assistant. The reality was simply that
I didn't have full time to devote to election methods and I was trying
to leverage what little time I had by working with him and leveraging
his massive time committments on the subject.

I reply:

Your website would have been, and still would be, nothing without my 
articles, definitions, etc.

That´s why you still haven´t deleted my definitions from your Condorcet 
explanation page.
You still advocate wv Condorcet at your webite, which, as I said, would be 
nothing without things from me.

Russ continues:

Mike, I got news for you. Your ideas may or may not have merit, but even
if they do, you are not the legend you think you are.

I reply:

You said that before. When did I say that I was a legend? Or are you using 
ESP again? What did I say to you about using ESP? :-)

Saying that you´re nothing but a pretentious copier doesn´t mean that I´m 
saying that I´m a legend.

Russ continued:

And even if you
eventually succeed in getting your little criteria ideas accepted (and
that's a big if)

I reply:

I´m not trying to get my criteria accepted. As I carefully (but apparently 
not carefully enough) explained to you, I offer information, and what, if 
anything, is done with it is not my department. I offer, but I don´t 
promote.

Russ continues:

Your
pathetic little "career" never got off the ground and probably never
will.

I reply:

What career? So, not only do I have a career, but I have a pathetic career? 
I´m not interested in a career. I don´t do any of this for a career. I´ve 
suggested some criteria for judging compliance with an important standard. 
To repeat what I said, what, if any, use is made of what I offer isn´t my 
department.


Russ said:

You are a loser and you always will be.

I reply:

Rhetorical question: What does Russ think that I´m losing and will always 
lose? Position in his pecking order? Russ, you´ll never understand that your 
needs aren´t shared by everyone.

Russ continues:

You are nothing, Mike

I reply:

Not entirely clear what you mean. This too is a rhetorical question: What 
would I have to be to be a something to you. Why should I want to be a 
something to you? What am I with respect to EM or voting systems? Someone 
who has wanted to do his part to make information available, because the 
subject of voting systems has been underdiscussed, and hasn´t been dealt 
with as well as it should be.

Russ continued:
,
except perhaps a good janitor. I'll bet you clean toilets well. Keep up
the good work

I reply:

If that were my job, it would be legimate and honest work. You´re dying to 
know what I do, but sorry, I´m not the topic of EM.

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/