On Thu, 9 Nov 2006 21:27:56 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Barss
wrote:

Tom Watson wrote:

: Barss leaks:

:
: In other words, he's a troll.


: In the same sense that S. was a "gadfly".


No, in the same sense that you, like a lot of 15-year-old boys with
poor social skills, made an offensive post, then refused to answer questions
about it. Then replied to a thoughtful post (by Ed) in an immature
and bothersome way.

You're a troll, plain and simple. And deserving of the usual
respect.


-- Andy Barss


("You treat a person decently, not because of who they are but because
of who you are." Granny Watson)

("For Brutus is an honorable man." WS 1564 - 1616)

It might be instructive for you to read the original post before you
formulate the intent to disparage.

("As I would not be a troll, neither would I be trolled". AL 1809 -
1865) (I before E, except after careful reflection.)

When Socrates walked the Agora in Fifth Century Athens and asked
questions of his brothers with the pure intent of disturbing the
dissembling nature of their presumptions, was he a troll?

Was Socrates the first troll?

Nay, I place myself not in the same regard as that purest of Athenian
reasoners, yet I seek to emulate him in my shabby way, as so we should
in the regard of our betters.

It was a question needing asking, you see.

("Are we not men? No, we are Devo". Devo 1978 - 1978)

There is and has always been on the Wreck the weird tendency to
attempt the cross-pollination of the metallic and the organic, a kind
of miscegenation if you will or, if you won't , if that seems entirely
too politically incorrect, you may think of it as an unreasoning
desire to join oil and water - well, there is the essence of it.

Our machinist brethren occasionally wander from their purview and drag
their otherworldly assumptions into the simple world of wooddorking.

Their world may be likened unto that of the Forms described by Plato -
unchanging, unchangeable and lacking in the perversity that so
inhabits the organic realm.

I envy them their predictability but only to the point where
prediction and predilection are confused.

Yes, their predilection confuses them when they enter the organic
realm. There are too many variables for them to deal with and they
become very tense.

What profit it a man if he gains absolute accuracy for a moment over a
material that is constantly changing, and thus loses its very soul.

Give in to it, my brothers - give in to the variability, the inherent
unpredictability, the implied possibility of wonder and wondrous
results...

We can set our machinery to 0.0001 but our material has been changed
by the very act of processing it in that machine.

Our material will change in length and breadth and depth within one
revolution of the earth to a point that is several orders of magnitude
greater than that of our setup measurements.

Metaldorking is a game of knowledge and predictability - wooddorking
is a game of wisdom and possibility.

I submit to you the happy circumstance (for some) that a man who
begins with a Ryobi BT-3000, which has a variable of accuracy measured
in cubits, has the same chance of turning out a wonderful wooddorking
project as the man who roughs out on a CNC machine.

The machinist requires that his tools be perfect, in order to
accomplish his result. It is not a journey of discovery - it is
simply a walk from A to B.

The wooddorker must embrace the ineluctable organicity and essentially
flawed nature of his material, as he must do with himself - or do
without happiness.

The concentration on the machine, rather than the artifact and its
intent, is the main division.

It divides you from your art - and it divides you from your soul.


("There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." WS Hamlet A1 SV)

("Yeah, it'll cut it up for you - but the sumbitch won't teach you to
cook." Ron Popeil 1935 - ad nauseam)













Regards,

Tom Watson

tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)

http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/