>It is a waste of time for [Steve Austin] to defend his views even HERE
>on the reflector? Do you waste your time here?
You be the judge. Let's take this last exchange.
1. I felt duty-bound to correct what seemed to me a misstatement
by Steve Schimmrich.
2. You responded with a long post attacking Steve Austin,
in effect ignoring the plain thrust of my post (1).
3. I responded by pointing out that I wasn't defending Austin's views,
which I'm not competent to judge, but was merely stating that he
does do primary field research -- reiterating a point (1) that
should have been clear from the first.
4. You responded by asking me to invite Steve Austin to a debate on
this reflector.
5. I'm now drawn into an open-ended squabble, in which I really have
NO business, about whether Steve Austin should use the Internet, whether
Usenet forums have more than ephemeral value, whether Steve Austin answers
your letters with the dispatch and detail you require, the merits of the
reflector, etc., etc.
You and Steve Austin have a long personal history, Glenn. I have no desire to
interpose myself into that history, nor to try to persuade Steve to
debate you here. "Waste of time" is my best guess at Steve's response,
in the light of (a) what has already passed between you two in the past decade
or so, (b) his research commitments elsewhere, (c) the likelihood that the
debate would devolve into name-calling and the interposition of entirely
unrelated issues, and (d) the probable outcome of even deeper ill-will
between the warring camps on the age question.
Now I should get back to lurking, and to work.
Paul Nelson