If it is hard to read my emotional level concerning this issue because of it being e-mail, let me clarify. I told JJ in private early on I found this discussion very stimulating and was having fun with it. I have experienced high frustration when I have made points that I felt were unheard, and disappointed when JJ was replying to things I didn't say, but I always tried to clarify what I was saying.
I have not been saying that you have said things you did not say. I may have made some original comments as we all have. I think all of us have wandered too far off topic rather than sticking with a point until it is resolved.
I believe I have stated quite openly that once clarified I was willing to go along with JJ's definition of tyranny. I would hope as your editor, JJ, that you would be able to see that your definition is not clear the way you wrote Chapter 13 and a partial re-write is in order, so that others do not make the same mistake. I believe Larry gave you some good pointers on the methodology of how to make it clearer. When an author is using the third most common definition of a word, he must be extremely sure the correct definition is conveyed. I believe you have been extremely stubborn on this point and it is only going to hurt the teachings you are trying to convey.
The various dictionaries list the various meanings in different order. Because a definition is listed first, second or third means nothing. What is important is that the writer or speaker finds the definition that matches that which he is trying to convey.
If I am talking about a "branch" office, is it correct to insist that I am talking about a "branch" of a tree because that is listed first in the dictionary??? In my dictionary the correct definition of "branch" as in the branch office context is number four.
As I said, the important thing is to find the definition that suits what you are trying to convey and then use it. I see this as basic and easy to grasp and cannot understand why it seems so difficult to grasp nor can I see why I am being stubborn for explaining to you what I mean when I use the word.
If I were talking, for example, about branch offices and someone insisted I was being stubborn because I would not switch the topic to trees I would be bewildered as I am with this dialog.
I have been very surprised when I see JJ really hates to admit ever being wrong
I love finding out I am wrong. It means I have something new to learn. Why are you making such a negative judgment on me? I would appreciate it much more if you demonstrated where I am wrong and then let the point make itself. That way judging me as "hating" being wrong when in reality I generally love it, would not be necessary.
By the way, I do not see any of the four of you admitting being wrong. Does this mean you guys are stubborn and "hate:" being wrong also???
and ignores points he can't refute that other people make,
You are judging me again - judging that my motive or will is that I decide to ignore points I can't refute. I have never done this in my life. If I think cannot refute a point I will either consider there is something to it or look into it until I can find out one way or another.
I have not consciously ignored any points because I do not think I can refute them, but may have missed some because of time and this is your next point.
(JJ is) claiming that it is a time factor--and it may be. :) I see this as a typical leader "fault" however and will give him some slack, but I still notice it.
In the past week I have posted over 30,000 words to the Keys attempting to answer all your questions, communicate effectively and heal disagreements. This has not been easy for me. For one thing, I am only able to type with three fingers so it takes me twice as long to type as some of you. To put out this volume of answers I have worked through the night, often until six in the morning. In addition, I have put off work for my business and have worked during the day also at significant expense to my business and relationship with my wife who is loosing some patience with me for ignoring the business and the book.
Why have I run ragged this past week in answering your objections?
Because I love you, my friends. You four have been with the group for a long time now and have contributed valuable service and I have felt that it is worth whatever it takes to keep you with us and your hearts and minds positive toward me.
Now after all this sacrifice for you, my friends, I am told that this inability to do more is a "leader fault" I have. This statement by one I respect so much makes my heart sink. I wonder to myself, what could I have done more? What could I have done so those questioning me would not feel ignored or that I am ducking their questions?
You say I have offended you with my tone. I did not mean to do this. I asked Artie to read my letter to you and asked her if she thought I was being offensive and she could not see anything that would have offended her. She has often talked me into changing my post when I have been a little too critical. Even so, you are you and have unique feelings and I will attempt to be more sensitive.
Copyright 2002 by J.J. Dewey, All Rights Reserved