re: [gutvol-d] re: Kevin Kelly in NYT on future of digital libraries]

michael said:
It is quite obvious that many people view both Bowerbird's and Mr. Rothman's comments as attacks, even Bowerbird and Mr. Rothman, though rarely would the mention include self-reflection on this matter.
for the record, i do not feel i have made _any_ "attacks". and i firmly believe if you look at what i have actually said -- as opposed to how david has _characterized_ what i've said -- you will see that that is so. indeed, if you find otherwise, i'd be happy for you to draw attention to it, so i can explain. i have said _unflattering_ things. but with good evidence. i _never_ resort to spin-doctoring, such as his name-calling. he flames me, and then tries to blame it on me by calling me "a troll". don't tell me you can't see through that transparency. and really, take a look at the latest thread. i made a simple point -- which is that it is relatively easy for a programmer to "embed" shared annotations into an e-book -- and he eventually ended up dragging in a _myriad_ of unrelated charges, some of them _silly_. meanwhile, it still remains easy to embed annotations in an e-book. contrary to what a naive observer might be led to believe by teleblog -- or even his recent posts here -- openreader is _not_ the only way to provide "interactivity" to electronic-books. not even close. all these other issues that he is throwing up are a _smokescreen_ intended to divert your attention from that very simple fact, and if anyone reading these posts doesn't realize that, then i _fear_ for their reading comprehension. of course, david doesn't _want_ people to read these posts, that's why he's throwing up a barrage, hoping that lurkers will just view the subject-headers (where he promulgates his smear job by prominently using the "troll" word). is what i'm saying here unflattering? you betcha. is it true? you betcha. but i don't do "attacks". i do hard-headed analysis with a focus on fact. and i don't get emotionally involved -- it interferes badly with the logic. it's a lot smarter to stay on-point. i do a lot of self-reflection. i can look at myself in a mirror just fine... -bowerbird

Bowerbird@aol.com wrote:
it is relatively easy for a programmer to "embed" shared annotations into an e-book
How would you know?
i do a lot of self-reflection. i can look at myself in a mirror just fine...
Snip. Another one for "The Showcase of Pudd'nhead Bowerbird" at: http://www.gnutenberg.de/bowerbird/ -- Marcello Perathoner webmaster@gutenberg.org

Marcello Perathoner wrote:
i do a lot of self-reflection. i can look at myself in a mirror just fine...
Snip. Another one for "The Showcase of Pudd'nhead Bowerbird" at:
Aren't you honouring this, ehm, charachter a bit too much by putting this much effort into having a collection of his delusions online? I am not to judge your pastimes, but personally I would have preferred a thorough discussion on the number of angels that fits on the tip of a needle instead. Regards, Walter
participants (3)
-
Bowerbird@aol.com
-
Marcello Perathoner
-
Walter van Holst