Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Y
What Howard or ANYONE else would say about an independent interpretation of the use of the methodology means ZIP to me. Once an idea leave one's mind and moves to another, it is subject to new scrutiny with objective eyes. If subsequent evaluations don't see the same things, that's just the way it is, period.
|
an interesting quote, considering that you were the one with the silly remark about Huey Mahl being ashamed of someone.
Once again, in your desire to be the brilliant contrarian, you have started with one off the wall, silly statement. Then, your stubbornness and arrogance forces you to keep backing yourself further and further into a corner.
I suspect that no one really cares whether you use the 1st fraction or not, even though you have said in the past that you use elements of it in the E/EP and other readouts. The only thing that upsets people is that you set yourself up as an expert on the Sartin methodology.
Doc Sartin believed strongly in the 1st fraction. Jimmy Bradshaw believed strongly in the use of the 1st fraction. That means it is a pretty basic item within the methodology.
I know you are on the cutting edge of knowledge and everyone here is just stuck in the mud. You have certainly said it often enough. Why not become the guru of your own methodology. Then you won't be bothered with those stodgy ideas that exist in the Sartin methodology.
Or, do whatever the hell you want to. Just quit claiming that your way is the only right way to do things. Your pompous, dogmatic raving gets a bit thick at times.
Dick