The Magic Caf
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The workers » » Marlo a Thief (8 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4..12~13~14 [Next]
ASW
View Profile
Inner circle
1879 Posts

Profile of ASW
Quote:
On 2011-05-12 18:45, Turk wrote:
Quote:
On 2011-05-12 16:10, ASW wrote:
Quote:
On 2011-05-12 12:30, R.E. Byrnes wrote:
Has something to do with someone else having shown him something in confidence before he published it, and conventional notions about "ethics" taking over from there


Fixed that for you.

:)


Andrew,

First off, my issue, as set forth in this post, is not what Marlo may or may not have done or said. (Those issues and the facts and opinions regarding the same has been hammered to death in many many prior posts.) Rather, my issue is the manner in which you inserted your opinion into the mix, and, in doing so, how you, intentionally or unintentionally, attempted to ascribe attribution for your remarks to Mr. Byrnes.

With all due respect, perhaps a better way for you to have "fixed this" for R.E. Byrnes would have been to have not manipulated his quote in the first place to reflect your editorializing but, instead to have:

1) First provided Mr. Byrnes' quoted remark using the Café's "quote" feature, and,

2) Then just come right out and stated your premise (perhaps with with words to the effect that: "Perhaps, for clarification, a better, and in my opinion, a more accurate perspective of what the issue is, might be 'Has something to do with someone else having shown him something in confidence before he published it, and conventional notions about "ethics" taking over from there'".

In that way, the reader would be clear as to what Mr. Byrnes' comments actually were and to now also be able to understand the manner in which you felt his statement did not accurately reflect the facts as you understand them to be.

Your use of the phrase "Fixed that for you" and your use of the emoticon does little to alert a subsequent reader as to what Mr. Byrnes' original quote actually was and in what way you had "fixed it" for him. Quite frankly, upon reading your post, I had naively first attributed good motives to you in that I had (incorrectly) surmised that you had merely corrected a typo, or taken out a duplicate use of a word,…or some other innocuous form of stylistic correction. However, curious as to what you had actually "fixed" for him, I took the time to go back, look up and read his original quote.

Upon reading Mr. Byrnes' actual quote, I was shocked to learn that the two quotes (i.e., yours and his) could not have been more dissimilar in nature and content and that you had, in fact, actually misstated what you had actually done in your post. You had not "fixed it" for Mr. Byrnes. Rather, by you attributing your remarks even tangentially to Mr. Byrnes, you had seriously misrepresented both Mr. Byrnes' actual comment and you had seamlessly interjected your own opinion as his own. In effect, under the attempted guise of humor, you had substituted and interjected your editorial opinion for his...and done so ostensibly under his name.

To modify another person's quoted remarks as you did (particularly by way and use of the Café's "quote" feature), even under the most innocuous of motives would and did cause confusion as to what Mr. Byrnes actually stated and/or believed. As such, I would respectfully suggest that such technique and device by you violates accepted standards of journalism and publication style.

Not cool.

Giving you the benefit of the doubt as to your actual motives in the aforesaid, a person can chalk your comments up to a feeble attempt at humor gone awry. But, that said, still not cool in that a third person could read your post and ascribe comments and opinion to Mr. Byrnes that are clearly not his own. This is the way that misinformation can be disseminated and reputations can be damaged.

Finally, this post does not attempt to address the issue of any perceived pomposity or arrogance that your unsolicited "fixing of things for Mr Brynes" might evoke. Those issues are best left for another day.


The foregoing is all IMHO; the reader's mileage may vary...and probably does.

Best regards,

Mike


Hey, Mike: it was obvious to anyone with half a brain that I had doctored the quote. That's why I wrote "fixed that for you" and inserted a smiley. It amazes me that you went to all that effort over a smart @ss post in a smart @ss thread. I'm sure Mr.Byrnes (whose posts I enjoy) couldn't give a fig.

Actually, let's see you parse the original Byrnes post with as much analytical passion as you did my post. That execrise would be far more interesting than wasting effort on my facetious throw away.

cheers & etc

Andrew

PS. Trini - there's some excellent discussion of Marlo on TSD. Did you miss it?
Whenever I find myself gripping anything too tightly I just ask myself "How would Guy Hollingworth hold this?"

A magician on the Genii Forum

"I would respect VIPs if they respect history."

Hideo Kato
R.E. Byrnes
View Profile
Inner circle
1206 Posts

Profile of R.E. Byrnes
No objection here to the "manipulation" of the post. nor was I "shocked to learn" that it had been altered, substantially; that was the obvious -- not covert or malicious or devious - intention. anyone with a modicum of an ironic sense would pick that up. by the usual rules and standards of parody, nothing was "ascribed" to me. that's how things happen. someone says something. someone else agrees or disagrees and responds to it. some responses are more artful than others. others are very long and weirdly consumed with something that doesn't matter a great deal.
BarryFernelius
View Profile
Inner circle
Still learning, even though I've made
2533 Posts

Profile of BarryFernelius
Quote:
On 2011-05-12 18:09, MagicT wrote:
I understand the idea of not flaming the dead, but many have said that Marlo was a thief. I am looking for hard facts as to why this is said. Was it said while he was alive? Was it said directly to him? Did he ever defend his position? If so, how, when, and where?



Thank You,
Trini


In your spare time, are you in the habit of falsely shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater? Smile

If you have sincere interest in this topic, read David Solomon's book Solomon's Mind and/or discuss this issue with David Solomon himself. David was part of Marlo's inner circle, and (in my opinion) he can give you a balanced point of view about this issue.
"To achieve great things, two things are needed: a plan and not quite enough time."

-Leonard Bernstein
Slide
View Profile
Special user
533 Posts

Profile of Slide
"Was it said while he was alive? Was it said directly to him? Did he ever defend his position? If so, how, when, and where? "

I'll make it easy for you: in every endeavor, the people at the top of the endeavor have been called thieves by other people who are at the top of that endeavor: it is called professional jealousy. Edison hated Tesla. Tesla hated Edison. Picasso hated Braque and Matisse. It was always such and digging into the why doesn't make the world any smarter or you a better card person. Just take it for granted: anyone at the top of his field is hated by others at the top of their fields.
Turk
View Profile
Inner circle
Portland, OR
3546 Posts

Profile of Turk
Quote:
On 2011-05-13 05:03, ASW wrote:


Hey, Mike: it was obvious to anyone with half a brain that I had doctored the quote. That's why I wrote "fixed that for you" and inserted a smiley. It amazes me that you went to all that effort over a smart @ss post in a smart @ss thread. I'm sure Mr.Byrnes (whose posts I enjoy) couldn't give a fig.

Actually, let's see you parse the original Byrnes post with as much analytical passion as you did my post. That execrise would be far more interesting than wasting effort on my facetious throw away.

cheers & etc

Andrew

***




"...it was obvious to anyone with half a brain that I had doctored the quote."

Ah!! The old Ad Hominem attack. The last refuge of the person who cannot argue the points on the merits. I'm really disappointed in you for having to stoop to such a low level of argument.

Actually, the very first time I read your post I understood that you had made some kind of change to R.E. Byrnes' post. (Your "fixed it" comment and your smiley were not missed by me.) But, that said, the extent of such quote modification was never clear on its face. What was not known (and what you conveniently left out) was R.E. Byrnes' exact quote. By such omission, a person is unable to appreciate the proffered wit and attack on Marlo that you intended. It was only by taking the time to go back and find Mr. Byrnes' actual quote that a person could and would be able to see specifically how you had "fixed it". And that was the point I was addressing in my prior post.

Had you just stated your opinion as your opinion, I would have had no objection to your posting your strong characterization of Marlo. You will also note that in my original post on this thread, I mentioned that I had no quarrel with you expressing your point of view and had only wished that if you were going to modify a person's quoted remarks, the accepted scholarly and journalistic form is to first quote the actual quote and then post the "altered" quote immediately thereafter. Assuming you to not be lacking in the brain power that you ascribe to me, I'm sorry if those points were lost on you.

In fact, initially, I did read and enjoy your post for its writing style. In a PM to another Café member, I wrote: "Quite frankly, I found Andrew's comment to be very well written and, in fact, from a rhetorical standpoint, I admired the conciseness and clarity of the sentence structure and the points expressed." It was only after I went back and read R.E. Byrnes' actual post, that it now became obvious exactly how you had "fixed" it.

Again, had you posted Mr. Byrnes' exact quote in juxtaposition to your intended satiric comment, not only would the original quote accurately remain but, by the clear juxtaposition of the two statements, there would have been no misunderstanding as to the actual quote, and, your intended irony and satire would have become clear and made powerful by such juxtaposition/i].

My objection was (and is) over the [i]method
used by you and not the substance of your comment itself. We are just going to have to agree to disagree on the appropriateness of altering another person's quoted remarks without also making clear the full scope and extent of such alteration.

Again, just IMHO. Your mileage may vary...and probably does.

Respectfully,

Mike

P.S. OOPS! I almost forgot your other comment, to wit:

"Actually, let's see you parse the original Byrnes post with as much analytical passion as you did my post. That exercrise would be far more interesting than wasting effort on my facetious throw away."

Respectfully, there is no need to analyze such comment. Mr. Byrnes' comment was clearly stated and, in all regards, was clearly his own. As such, I have no quarrel with either the form or manner of those remarks.
Magic is a vanishing Art.

This must not be Kansas anymore, Toto.

Eschew obfuscation.
Craig Ousterling
View Profile
Special user
579 Posts

Profile of Craig Ousterling
Turk, didn't you just do the same thing to ASW by changing the PS. Trini line to *** ? In essence you quoted him and changed his quote just like what you overwhelmingly wrote about? It looks like the original(?) ASW quote had a swear word in it now.

How'd this thread get SO derailed? Am I missing the inside joke here?
Bryce Spears
View Profile
New user
20 Posts

Profile of Bryce Spears
Actually Mike, it was never clear on its face to you. I think everyone else got it.

Trini...nice troll attempt. Try to be more subtle next time. The PG attempt was much better.
Turk
View Profile
Inner circle
Portland, OR
3546 Posts

Profile of Turk
Quote:
On 2011-05-13 16:47, Craig Ousterling wrote:
Turk, didn't you just do the same thing to ASW by changing the PS. Trini line to *** ? ***

***




Hi, Craig.

Actually, no. Just as in my truncated use of your above quote, the asterisks were used to alert readers that the entire quote was not being quoted or commented upon and that only that portion of the quote being commented upon remained. The use of asterisks for that purpose is the accepted grammatical form for alerting the reader to such deletion(s) and such fact. (And, unlike, ASW alleged quote of Mr. Byrnes' words, I did not purport to put words into anyone's mouth nor did I alter or substitute for any of the quoted text that remained--either in Trini's quoted remarks or in your quoted remarks or in anyone's quoted remarks.

That said, in reading some of the posts defending Andrew's practices in this matter, it is obvious that his supporters either do not know what are the accepted grammatical practices and conventions when utilizing quote marks,...or they do not care and they rebuff such grammatical practices as being unimportant or unnecessary. And, it is equally obvious that Andrew's supporters are satisfied with the fact that somehow Andrew alerted them to the fact that he had somehow taken liberties with the Byrnes quote and they couldn't care less as to the extent of such liberties being taken or the resulting misquote.

Cool. I "get it". I don't agree with some people's point of view in this regard (i.e., that, in quoting another person, it is OK to ignore proper grammatical conventions), but,...I "get it". I take issue to any form of misquoting and find any such misquoting to be serious. Others do not. As such, we are just going to have to agree to disagree on the seriousness of this practice.

I now return you to your regular channel. (grin)

Respectfully,

Mike

P.S. How seriously do I take and advocate accurate quoting of another's remarks? Very seriously--as evidenced by the fact that on a prior occaion, I found that I had inadvertently cut and pasted remarks of mine into the body of a quoted remark by Hary Lorayne. And, immediately upon my discovery of my error, I set the record straight and I apologized both to Mr. Lorayne and to the Café membership. (i.e., See the Café page located at: http://themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic......start=30 ) Misquoting another person for whatever reason is still serious and a breach of accepted grammatical standards and practices.

Sorry for being so anal retentive about this point. Its just that whenever I read a quoted remark, from a historical and scholarly standpoint, I'd like to be able to have confidence that such remark was accurately quoted...and not have to always trace back to the original primary source of the original quote in order to know what that person actually said.

Again, for whatever reason(s), some people do not care about the accuracy of actual quoted material so we must continue to agree to disagree.
Magic is a vanishing Art.

This must not be Kansas anymore, Toto.

Eschew obfuscation.
MagicT
View Profile
Inner circle
New Orleans
1248 Posts

Profile of MagicT
I am still interested to know from others why it is said that Marlo stole things. I am interested in the history of this.



Thank You,
Trini
Trini Montes
BarryFernelius
View Profile
Inner circle
Still learning, even though I've made
2533 Posts

Profile of BarryFernelius
Trini,

You live in the same city as Jon Racherbaumer. Maybe he could help you out...
"To achieve great things, two things are needed: a plan and not quite enough time."

-Leonard Bernstein
Turk
View Profile
Inner circle
Portland, OR
3546 Posts

Profile of Turk
Quote:
On 2011-05-13 19:00, MagicT wrote:
I am still interested to know from others why it is said that Marlo stole things. I am interested in the history of this.



Thank You,
Trini


I agree with you on this, Trini.

Yes, it would be nice for people knowledgeable in this matter to post specific example of any such alleged "stealing". At various times, such allegations are raised against other highly successful magicians and it would be helpful if the evidence being relied upon is specifically set forth so that readers can judge the truthfulness and the severity of any such alleged breaches. It seems that allegations of stealing seem to arise in direct proportion to the fame and notoriety of a person and, most such charges do not seem to be publicly made by other famous well-know magicians.

In this regard, I think that BarryFernelius had an excellent suggestion when he offered: "If you have sincere interest in this topic, read David Solomon's book Solomon's Mind and/or discuss this issue with David Solomon himself. David was part of Marlo's inner circle, and (in my opinion) he can give you a balanced point of view about this issue." I wish that I had a copy of David Solomon's "Solomon's Mind" book to see what he offers in way fo perspective and/or rebuttal.

One thing that I am always mindful of is the possibility (probability?) of "independent creation". Also, it's one thing to casually mention that you might be "thinking of a way to perform and "XYZ" effect...but you have no particulars in that regard other than a presentational theme idea. It is another thing for someone to run with any such idea and actually flesh out a working methodology for accomplishing such an effect.

ASW's "quote" about Marlo that it "Has something to do with someone else having shown him something in confidence before he published it, and conventional notions about "ethics" taking over from there" is a serious charge and, if for common decency alone, it would have been nice for Andrew to have laid out the specifics of the charge instead of engaging in what might be charitably characterized as a generalized "drive-by shooting" of a man who is dead and can no longer defend himself.

So yes, I'm with you on this in wishing to have specifics of any alleged stealing so that the frequency and severity and the circumstances under which the complained-of act occurred could be evaluated in context.

Respectfully,

Mike
Magic is a vanishing Art.

This must not be Kansas anymore, Toto.

Eschew obfuscation.
Vlad_77
View Profile
Inner circle
The Netherlands
5829 Posts

Profile of Vlad_77
Trini,

In the PG thread I tried to be very civil with you. I shall once again try. But frankly Trini, how does this topic further your growth as a magician?

Do some research Trini. Even if you don't have a large library, there are tons of online resources that are invaluable for tracing the pedigree of an effect.

I would recommend the following:

http://magicref.tripod.com/books.htm

http://archive.denisbehr.de/

http://conjuringarts.org/

In addition, you can sign up for Chris Wasshuber's Magic Knowledge Base on Lybrary.com

The really fun part of course is that while you are researching, you just might find something that will enhance YOUR magic! You have been given sage advice already by others in this thread.

Ahimsa,
Vlad
MagicT
View Profile
Inner circle
New Orleans
1248 Posts

Profile of MagicT
Vlad,
I TOO will try to be civil with you. Uhm, I think I AM doing some research by asking questions here on the Magic Café. Funny how you did NOT list this website as a resource. Is it not a resource? Isn't the motto, "Magicians HELPING magicians?" In order to do research, one must have questions. I have questions, and am asking here on this "online resource" for help in hopes of getting some answers.

Also, to answer your question about me growing as a magician, I never once said in my initial post, nor any other posts regarding this matter that I am looking to grow as a magician. Please show me where I did. I am asking a question because of my own curiosity. Is this such a bad thing? Is it against the rules, or your rules, here to seek answers to accusations I have read about or heard about?

If I may ask you the same type of question, with your HUGE vocabulary... How is you responding in this thread helping YOU further your growth as a magician? Any idea? Honestly, I really don't care. If you do not like my questions, then just don't read my posts, or just do not reply to them.


Have a WONDERFUL day, and may all your MARLO be true.



Thank You,
Trini
Trini Montes
MagicT
View Profile
Inner circle
New Orleans
1248 Posts

Profile of MagicT
I am not saying that Marlo was a thief, nor am I saying he was not. I never knew the man to form my own opinion. If I ask a student of his, it will be a biased opinion. I am looking for those who accuse him of stealing material, and have been harsh to supply hard evidence. I don't mean it as a challenge, but as a friendly request.




Thanks,
Trini
Trini Montes
BrandonWilliams
View Profile
Loyal user
241 Posts

Profile of BrandonWilliams
Hmm, the "academics" don't know what they're getting into either. My thoughts anyway...
ASW
View Profile
Inner circle
1879 Posts

Profile of ASW
Quote:
On 2011-05-13 16:25, Turk wrote:
Quote:
On 2011-05-13 05:03, ASW wrote:


Hey, Mike: it was obvious to anyone with half a brain that I had doctored the quote. That's why I wrote "fixed that for you" and inserted a smiley. It amazes me that you went to all that effort over a smart @ss post in a smart @ss thread. I'm sure Mr.Byrnes (whose posts I enjoy) couldn't give a fig.

Actually, let's see you parse the original Byrnes post with as much analytical passion as you did my post. That execrise would be far more interesting than wasting effort on my facetious throw away.

cheers & etc

Andrew

***




"...it was obvious to anyone with half a brain that I had doctored the quote."

Ah!! The old Ad Hominem attack. The last refuge of the person who cannot argue the points on the merits. I'm really disappointed in you for having to stoop to such a low level of argument.

Actually, the very first time I read your post I understood that you had made some kind of change to R.E. Byrnes' post. (Your "fixed it" comment and your smiley were not missed by me.) But, that said, the extent of such quote modification was never clear on its face. What was not known (and what you conveniently left out) was R.E. Byrnes' exact quote. By such omission, a person is unable to appreciate the proffered wit and attack on Marlo that you intended. It was only by taking the time to go back and find Mr. Byrnes' actual quote that a person could and would be able to see specifically how you had "fixed it". And that was the point I was addressing in my prior post.

Had you just stated your opinion as your opinion, I would have had no objection to your posting your strong characterization of Marlo. You will also note that in my original post on this thread, I mentioned that I had no quarrel with you expressing your point of view and had only wished that if you were going to modify a person's quoted remarks, the accepted scholarly and journalistic form is to first quote the actual quote and then post the "altered" quote immediately thereafter. Assuming you to not be lacking in the brain power that you ascribe to me, I'm sorry if those points were lost on you.

In fact, initially, I did read and enjoy your post for its writing style. In a PM to another Café member, I wrote: "Quite frankly, I found Andrew's comment to be very well written and, in fact, from a rhetorical standpoint, I admired the conciseness and clarity of the sentence structure and the points expressed." It was only after I went back and read R.E. Byrnes' actual post, that it now became obvious exactly how you had "fixed" it.

Again, had you posted Mr. Byrnes' exact quote in juxtaposition to your intended satiric comment, not only would the original quote accurately remain but, by the clear juxtaposition of the two statements, there would have been no misunderstanding as to the actual quote, and, your intended irony and satire would have become clear and made powerful by such juxtaposition/i].

My objection was (and is) over the [i]method
used by you and not the substance of your comment itself. We are just going to have to agree to disagree on the appropriateness of altering another person's quoted remarks without also making clear the full scope and extent of such alteration.

Again, just IMHO. Your mileage may vary...and probably does.

Respectfully,

Mike

P.S. OOPS! I almost forgot your other comment, to wit:

"Actually, let's see you parse the original Byrnes post with as much analytical passion as you did my post. That exercrise would be far more interesting than wasting effort on my facetious throw away."

Respectfully, there is no need to analyze such comment. Mr. Byrnes' comment was clearly stated and, in all regards, was clearly his own. As such, I have no quarrel with either the form or manner of those remarks.


When I get a free moment I'll try and read through this or ask someone to send me the key points.
Whenever I find myself gripping anything too tightly I just ask myself "How would Guy Hollingworth hold this?"

A magician on the Genii Forum

"I would respect VIPs if they respect history."

Hideo Kato
Justin W
View Profile
Special user
Lawrence, KS
929 Posts

Profile of Justin W
I'll make a Powerpoint.
ASW
View Profile
Inner circle
1879 Posts

Profile of ASW
Quote:
On 2011-05-13 19:45, Turk wrote:

ASW's "quote" about Marlo that it "Has something to do with someone else having shown him something in confidence before he published it, and conventional notions about "ethics" taking over from there" is a serious charge and, if for common decency alone, it would have been nice for Andrew to have laid out the specifics of the charge instead of engaging in what might be charitably characterized as a generalized "drive-by shooting" of a man who is dead and can no longer defend himself.


Anyone with more than a cursory knowledge of card magic in the 20th century would know that very famous magicians have accused Marlo of publishing other people's material or trying to degrade their right to be identified as the originator, i.e., Doc Daley and Herb Zarrow. Late in life Marlo was famous for attempting to undermine creative ownership of material in many of the major published hardcovers, writing long Unabomber-esque letters to a list of famous magicians. He did this in regard to Jerry Sadowitz's and Darwin Ortiz's books and many others. Sadowitz republished one of the letters and parsed the bejeezus out of it in The Crimp. As I recall, though the book is in storage back in Australia, the Solomon book addresses some of this behaviour directly and it is clear that Dave Solomon felt betrayed by Marlo's actions, though he maintained his friendship and respect.

I'm treating this thread with the level of seriousness it deserves, so the above information is a freebie. You'll have to do your own research from this point. As for your fiery white hot puritanical mission to address the heresy of my earlier frivolous post, I can only imagine that you have a humour deficit or that I slapped you down on some forum at some point. If the latter, I've well and truly forgotten it and I suggest you move on for your own mental health. On the upside, you write well and with passion, and that's something rare on magic forums and which I encourage.
Whenever I find myself gripping anything too tightly I just ask myself "How would Guy Hollingworth hold this?"

A magician on the Genii Forum

"I would respect VIPs if they respect history."

Hideo Kato
Vlad_77
View Profile
Inner circle
The Netherlands
5829 Posts

Profile of Vlad_77
Quote:
On 2011-05-13 20:58, MagicT wrote:
Vlad,
I TOO will try to be civil with you. Uhm, I think I AM doing some research by asking questions here on the Magic Café. Funny how you did NOT list this website as a resource. Is it not a resource? Isn't the motto, "Magicians HELPING magicians?" In order to do research, one must have questions. I have questions, and am asking here on this "online resource" for help in hopes of getting some answers.

Also, to answer your question about me growing as a magician, I never once said in my initial post, nor any other posts regarding this matter that I am looking to grow as a magician. Please show me where I did. I am asking a question because of my own curiosity. Is this such a bad thing? Is it against the rules, or your rules, here to seek answers to accusations I have read about or heard about?

If I may ask you the same type of question, with your HUGE vocabulary... How is you responding in this thread helping YOU further your growth as a magician? Any idea? Honestly, I really don't care. If you do not like my questions, then just don't read my posts, or just do not reply to them.


Have a WONDERFUL day, and may all your MARLO be true.



Thank You,
Trini


Trini,

Before I list some points, I DO have a question for you: WHY would you NOT want to grow as a magician???!!! It seems rather pointless to engage in an endeavor and NOT seek to improve one's self.

1. By writing in my post that others here have given you sage advice, it stands to reason that the Café IS a resource.

2. Thank you for the attack on my vocabulary. I consider it a compliment. I refuse to code-switch Trini.

As for why I reply to your posts, I will answer by using your own attack on me regarding the apparent omission of the Café as a resource. How are you - as a magician - helping other magicians by such a thread? I really am quite mystified as to what constructive purpose such a thread serves. When I politely stated that you do research it was a suggestion that I had hoped you would understand as a means to make your own informed decisions. However Trini, I watched your devolution of the PG thread and the same is happening here. As you can see, there is controversy about Marlo; this is nothing new Trini. Asking questions IS a good thing Trini, but also doing one's own homework can yield satisfying results. So while you are free to heed advice or not, you would be hard pressed to defend a position that eschews personal investigation and engages solely in asking the opinion of others. In the end Trini the answer to which you will arrive is the very answer that you want to hear.

One final comment Trini: I simply love the richness of language. I do not nor have I ever claimed that I am "above" you or others. In fact some of the best posts on the Café have been produced by people who write in a concise manner. If a large vocabulary irritates you, then you are free to pass on reading posts which might happen to contain words with which you are unfamiliar. Conversely, you can employ a comprehension strategy known as contextual clues to parse the meaning of a word. Code-switching is a term used by linguists. It entails changing one's form of speech depending upon the situation one finds one's self in. Trust me Trini, as a rock musician I code-switch all the time when I am "rockin'." However, in a public forum which welcomes all non-offensive forms of written communication, I choose not to code-switch but rather write as I would speak in an oral forum as well. Ironically Trini, some words that I have used may have helped some of the younger people here in expanding their personal lexicon and in that respect, I do not see the harm in it.

I will close by saying that we have indeed come to a sorry point in our society when a love for the richness of language is seen as a bad thing. I wish you the best Trini and it is my hope at least that I will one day encounter a thread started by you that asks and/or answers questions that further the community.

Ahimsa,
Vlad
R.E. Byrnes
View Profile
Inner circle
1206 Posts

Profile of R.E. Byrnes
"how does this topic further your growth as a magician?"

this is an absurdly narrow criterion. we get it. you're a very positive person who loves the "richness" of language. but someone else is interested in what went down with Marlo, and asked people who are likely to know something about it and have a diversity of viewpoints. rather than telling people what they should ask about, why not just move to a thread where like-minded people are "furthering their growth as magicians" with the proper degree of unctuous enthusiasm.
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The workers » » Marlo a Thief (8 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4..12~13~14 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2023 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.13 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL