What happens when success gets to your head...
My comment on the bubblegeneration blog
I really enjoy Umair's insights on strategic innovation, but he's out of control.
The irony is that his reponse to my comment was itself aggresive and uncivil - even after I explained (which I didn't have to do) why I asked if he was censoring comments.
I'm also still not sure why he refuses to acknowledge that he censors comments when his actions, even as described by himself, are a perfect definition of the process.
Furthermore, this, from my experience of reading his blog, is indicative of his approach to others who disagree with his opinions on strategy.
What a shame that someone with so much to offer has convinced himself that he alone is the sole proprietor of correctness in relation to the future of a field of study.
Make sure this doesn't happen to you, Sleiman. It's exactly this that I was speaking about in my earlier post in the topic on natural/man-made.
I really enjoy Umair's insights on strategic innovation, but he's out of control.
The irony is that his reponse to my comment was itself aggresive and uncivil - even after I explained (which I didn't have to do) why I asked if he was censoring comments.
I'm also still not sure why he refuses to acknowledge that he censors comments when his actions, even as described by himself, are a perfect definition of the process.
Furthermore, this, from my experience of reading his blog, is indicative of his approach to others who disagree with his opinions on strategy.
What a shame that someone with so much to offer has convinced himself that he alone is the sole proprietor of correctness in relation to the future of a field of study.
Make sure this doesn't happen to you, Sleiman. It's exactly this that I was speaking about in my earlier post in the topic on natural/man-made.
posted by KH @ 10:36 PM
7 Comments:
At 1:52 AM, September 16, 2006,
umair said…
Dude,
There's an existence proof that your spin on things is way (way) off the mark - the debates that happen every day on bubblegen.
If you're deliberately and personally insulting to me or others, sure, your comments will be yanked. But that's a very far cry from "censorship".
You're more than welcome to comment/discuss/debate at bubblegen anytime you like, like plenty of folks do every day.
At 5:55 PM, September 16, 2006,
KH said…
Actually, you’re right, Umair
There is some good debate on your site.
I deliberately made this post hyperbolic. My reasoning was…
1. I didn’t want to continue taking up comment space on this off-topic stuff on your blog
2. I knew that even if I did continue posting comments re: censorship you could just delete them and pretend they didn’t exist
3. So I decided to link to your article knowing full well that you would find out about it, read it, get upset and probably reply. By you replying I’ve now remedied the 2 issues above.
In any case, I figured the reason you’d comment here is because you, like most people, don’t like it when people post info about you that is clearly wrong.
I am no different, which is why I’m trying to clarify this.
I will explain one more time. I have no idea what was in the post you deleted. I saw that it existed and wanted to come back to it. The reference to censorship was not judging you. I feel there is nothing wrong with censoring in order to maintain the integrity of a blog, which you correctly state, is your creation. I don’t do it, but that doesn’t mean that I condemn those that do.
I notice some other people have been posting personal attacks on you and I’m hoping that your response was based on a misunderstanding of my intentions and a continuation of your frustration at these people.
So, to summarise, I don’t think I posted anything that was uncivil or deserved the reaction I received in your response. If it was interpreted as being that way, I apologise, but understand that that was not my intention.
Keep up the good work on your site
K
At 5:22 PM, September 17, 2006,
sleiman said…
It's also called the 'stink of enlightenment'.
Kim, I agree with you one hundred percent about what could happen to me. I'm always aware of it when I write but you also have to understand on what basis you (or anyone else) interpret what I write.
When it comes to communicating, yes, I agree that there is a responsibility on the communicator. However, there are two points here worth considering;
1. No matter how skilled the communicator, the person on the receiving end needs to step up to the mark (so to speak) in order to understand and;
2. I'm not 'communicating'. When I write something, the general feeling that I have when I do so is that I'm expressing. You may laugh at me playing semantics here but I think that this difference is an important one.
What I am doing is not devoid of logic or straight line reasoning but I'm doing my best not be limited by that. In that sense, it doesn't matter one little bit - not one iota - when I am wrong because it's simply not about being right or wrong. It's about being able to go to the next level, the next step, the next understanding, the next connection.
If what I write, or believe, doesn't allow me to make connections or to keep on going, then it will be up to me to recognise this. Sometimes I can recognise it fairly quickly, at other times, it takes a while (I'm talking years...) . If I can't recognise that I am wrong, well, that's too bad for me but the point is that I should never think about being right or wrong anyway. With this mentality opportunties for understanding always present themselves.
My use of 'culture' is a clear (or so I had thought) example of this. I read something, for example in one of Hatsumi-sensei's books, and ding it reminds me of something that I had read in some old Arabic poetry. This is not to say that these two sources are the ultimate in what is correct or that there is a direct historical connection. However, if among my interests are budo and Arabic culture, then why wouldn't I use these as sources? I mean, how many times have you heard me quote Star Wars and Chuck D? More important than what I think I know is what I am trying to do with I know. As Yoda said, "Sleiman, you must unlearn what you have learned."
I think that I may have already dealt with this but you are quite correct in that my posts are indeed more of a reflection of what I feel is 'correct' than a point for debate. Yet, this idea of correctness is also a trap that I am trying to stay clear of. That's why you'll find my posts a tad obscure at times. I'm trying to get beyond that right-wrong mentality.
In anycase, if someone responds to what I write I look at it as a chance to see if my ability to connect the dots is of any value. Therefore, when I respond, please bear this in mind. I'm not intentionally as such, stopping you from responding or trying to be a discussion party-pooper but I'd find it more interesting, in your case, to see where, whatever you think about, takes you.
In other words Kim, the sense behind your own journey is more important than the actual journey itself.
By the way, you are COMPLETELY wrong about you always being right. The last I heard -I- was the winner of rock-scissors-paper and all variations thereof...
At 10:47 AM, September 19, 2006,
KH said…
Ahhhhh, Sleiman
I know what you're saying and you're 100% right (except about me being wrong)
Nice to finally see some explanation and context in one of your posts, though.
Seems like I killed 2 birds with one stone...
:)
BTW - what's your tip for the weekend?
Bulldogs v Broncos?
Dragons v Storm?
At 12:11 PM, September 19, 2006,
Anonymous said…
Of course I'm right (except when I'm wrong...)
Don't go around killing too many birds though. Poor things, they were just hanging around shooting the breeze when BAM! "Hey, that hurts!"
(You haven't seen the birds cousin...)
Bulldogs to win, I mean, Folkes has been working all year on that el-Masri and Sonny-Bill clone.
I think that the Dragons will do it.... They are dangerous when they want to be.
At 6:02 AM, October 03, 2006,
Anonymous said…
Umair deletes many posts that disagree with him in a civil and reasoned fashion. I will shortly produce proof of his actions.
At 10:28 PM, October 03, 2006,
Anonymous said…
http://snarkston.blogspot.com/2006/10/best-thing-about-online-egos-is-how.html#links
Post a Comment
<< Home