If you rewrote this article _without_ the _eighteen_ uses of I, me, and my, people might take it more seriously. Otherwise some might think that this is entirely an ego exercise on your part.
If you rewrote this article _without_ the _eighteen_ uses of I, me, and my, people might take it more seriously. Otherwise some might think that this is entirely an ego exercise on your part.
I think you are asking too much! Find one person who takes this much beating from grifters and swindlers and are still standing and churning out post after post. I am sure for many individuals in the industry Gary's non-existence is preferrable to his existence. It's easy for you to preach for calm and balanced tone when you are not the one in the ring fighting.
When the attacks go to one's character/integrity/intelligence/quality of work...that is inherently personal. I feel for you...as I think that anyone paying attention must conclude that you have been a public beacon of intellectual honesty and integrity...and that others/biz have not...for obvious reasons ($$/power). And using 'it's only business, nothing personal'...often said with a wink...is still a cruel joke for those of us that try to remain human.
See that is interesting. When I read this Gary's article first time I did not even notice those "I, me, my" etc. I simply got a timeline of Gary's predictions and subsequent findings. After I read your post and went back to read the same article again, those "I, me, my" still did not catch my attention. See I pay attention to what were said, not how they were said, because they are irrelevant.
If what he stated were facts, what does it matter if it appears self-promoting or not to someone? In that case it is that someone's problem not his. If what he stated were not facts, then point out those non-facts please! Don't just put out "opinion" without evidence.
If you rewrote this article _without_ the _eighteen_ uses of I, me, and my, people might take it more seriously. Otherwise some might think that this is entirely an ego exercise on your part.
You ever been wrongly attacked by Altman, musk, and Leacin and hundred more for saying something that is true?
No, I haven't. And that is undoubtedly infuriating. However, I still think that a less personal response would carry more weight with readers.
I think you are asking too much! Find one person who takes this much beating from grifters and swindlers and are still standing and churning out post after post. I am sure for many individuals in the industry Gary's non-existence is preferrable to his existence. It's easy for you to preach for calm and balanced tone when you are not the one in the ring fighting.
When the attacks go to one's character/integrity/intelligence/quality of work...that is inherently personal. I feel for you...as I think that anyone paying attention must conclude that you have been a public beacon of intellectual honesty and integrity...and that others/biz have not...for obvious reasons ($$/power). And using 'it's only business, nothing personal'...often said with a wink...is still a cruel joke for those of us that try to remain human.
See that is interesting. When I read this Gary's article first time I did not even notice those "I, me, my" etc. I simply got a timeline of Gary's predictions and subsequent findings. After I read your post and went back to read the same article again, those "I, me, my" still did not catch my attention. See I pay attention to what were said, not how they were said, because they are irrelevant.
Very well said. Gary ruins what intellect he has with constant self-promoting, self-congratulatory and egotistical rants.
If what he stated were facts, what does it matter if it appears self-promoting or not to someone? In that case it is that someone's problem not his. If what he stated were not facts, then point out those non-facts please! Don't just put out "opinion" without evidence.