What I said was not bashing, child. I'm challenging other people to back up their opinions better. Don't like it? Cry to your mother about the bad man on the internet...
This is why I say most magicians are not realists. It's all moralizing and woulda-shoulda-coulda. I on the other hand endeavor to see things as they truly are. Rather than rigidly adhering to a framework of how I think the world should work, I remain flexible. You?
[/QUOTE]
This is funny.
I don't think I've ever read a single post by you, Steer, where you have backed anything up with either fact, logic, or appeal to anything beyond your limited experience.
Dozens of times you have been called out for claiming a position that is baseless when it comes to "how the world works."
Heck, In another thread, you even managed to speak for an entire generation of which you aren't even a part. As someone closer to that generation than you, I will tell you - you got it wrong.
In this thread I see people regurgitate lines from PR packages like they are real history. I see people make assumptions about how the entertainment world works based - I think - on their dreams and musings. (There is a reason that the phrase, "it's not what you know, it's who you know" is practically a mantra it is repeated so often. Read the Keith Barry interview in Genii. Here is the story of a guy who worked really hard to get his special. He worked really hard at meeting the people he needed to meet. Facts can be fun. Try them.)
I even here people claim that Criss Angel connects with his audiences, yet pulling up "criss angel reviews" on google takes me to page after page of scathing, negative reviews NOT from magicians, but from established critics in the entertainment field (not to mention those who made the mistake of buying a ticket to his show - their words, not mine.)
Ironically, the most positive of reviews come from - a magician. So, how is it that we are the only entertainment media that always bashes itself?
I see people using the IMS award as evidence of success without any knowledge or understanding of what that award is or how it is chosen. When I ask for them to back up their position, they call names.
Is that the type of response you want here, Steer?
Here's where I think it comes from: American teachers are taught that they should never correct a student for fear it will damage their self esteem. They are told to teach that all ways are valid. This of course developed out of the work of Carl Rogers. (for the record, I have a master's degree in education. For more information, check out talks by Dr. Robert Duke on problems with this approach to teaching. Howard Gardner, a name any well read person should know, also concurs with Duke. I say this, not to brag or look smart, but to show you what backing up information might look like.)
Anyway, this leads to the erroneous belief that if you think the world works a certain way, or if you have an idea, that it has merit.
It doesn't.
And, sadly, when the statement makers inability to back up their position with facts is called out, they resort with ad hominem troll like attacks. Rather than discussing Criss, posters in this thread and other have resorted to calling me names - failure, etc.
Is this really how desperate you people are?
So, if we are going to state opinions, then yes - we should always back them up with appeals to logic and fact.
I can't say that I've seen that in any post from either Steerpike or B.
So, are we capable of having a discussion using logic and facts.
I suppose that has yet to be seen.
I only came back to this board as a favor.
For whom and for what purpose. I suppose if people are allowed to make accusations that posts by others are done solely from jealousy, you should have no problem sharing what your actual motivations are. I figured it was nicer to ask you (since you brought it up, and everything) than proclaim I know, as others seem want to do.
