Re: Surrogate factoring, reasons for my concerns

From: Chas Brown (cbrown_at_cbrownsystems.com)
Date: 07/21/04 

Date: 21 Jul 2004 14:26:57 -0700

David C. Ullrich <ullrich@math.okstate.edu> wrote in message news:<qsuqf0pf8139mk78m9d1h0s4cfh39ctu1g@4ax.com>...
> On 20 Jul 2004 12:54:21 -0700, jstevh@msn.com (James Harris) wrote:
>
> >I'm going to top post here to point out that David Ullrich is one of
> >the people who posts who is an actual mathematician. He teaches at
> >Oklahoma State University.
> >

<snip>

> >Still he also posts a lot on sci.math and I've lost count how many
> >times he's called me an idiot!
>

By my count, only 16 times out of over 2100 replies; which I consider
tremendous restraint.

> Really? Could be I've called you an idiot, but I don't
> recall doing so.

These are usually in the context of a single word of reply; for
example:

|From: David C. Ullrich (ullrich@math.okstate.edu)
|Subject: Re: JSH: More on ring issue
|Newsgroups: sci.math
|Date: 2002-02-03 07:37:02 PST
|
|>>All of this is no joke as I did prove Fermat's Last Theorem, so
|>>your involvement in obscuring that that truth is of great
|>>concern to me, while I feel that you may indeed honestly just
|>>not realize what the truth is.
|
|>Idiot.

More often you use expressions of the form "when you say <x>, it makes
you _sound_ like an idiot" (at least 17 times); or "if your proof uses
undefined terms which you refuse to define you're making an idiot _of
yourself_" or similar (at least 9 times); which I consider as
statements about his _posts_, rather than implications that he
actually _is_ an idiot.

These fall into the category of calling his _arguments_ "idiotic"; for
example:

|From: David C. Ullrich (ullrich@math.okstate.edu)
|Subject: Re: JSH: Frustration, venting, weird group
|Newsgroups: sci.math
|Date: 2003-08-19 15:47:59 PST
|
|> Hint: Your traditional "this was all a test" thing works better if
|> you don't include idiotic statements like saying Z[1/2] is a field.

I'd take that as attacking the argument, rather than the arguer.

Of course, we must recall that in this case, the pot is at least as
guilty as the (putatative) kettle; for who can forget these classic
JSH ripostes?

  "Fuck off!!! You fucking stupid idiot!!! How many times do I have
   to tell you that your attention is not wanted David Ullrich?"

Or the more urgent:

  "*** OFF David Ullrich!!!!!!! *** off you stupid
   fucking idiot!!!!"

As far as I can tell, _you've_ only called _him_ a "fucking idiot"
once:

  "My god you're a fucking idiot. It doesn't _bug_ people when you
   talk about evil math society, it leads to gales of laughter. You
   really haven't figured that out yet? Wow."

> Trust me, if it ever did happen that I had a student
> who talked to me the way you do, he'd be gone _long_
> before things got to the point where I'd be talking
> to him the way I talk to you.
>

Somehow, I can't imagine someone repeating the same basic algebra
course for 6 years without gaining _some_ knowledge along the way.

Cheers - Chas "Just Keeping Score" Brown