John. I'm a great admirer of a feller named Christopher Hitchens. Perhaps you're familiar with his work and debating style. He too gets roundly pummled (tho the blows never seem to land) for simply trying to "stay on topic" and have an objective discussion regarding whatever idea that's been posited. And he gets castigated for "calling them as he sees them" (as I have, myownself, on many occasions). And he can be whithering in his choice of words and repostes. So, I understand, I believe, just how difficult it can be to simply try to establish a premise and convince others of its merits or its faults. Especially in the face of water-muddiers like friendship, loyalty, dogmatism and, all too often, chasms of misunderstanding.
All that said, don't you think your use of the word "apalling" was actually self-evidently hyperbolic and was also meant to hurt...to sting...to wound? That's what I thought when I read it. And, don't you think it actually weakened your argument. Maybe even destroyed it completely. Whatever the merits of your suppositions regarding Mike and by extension...his music...are, I don't think you'll get very far advancing them using those kind of words and tactics.
Self deprecation and good humor (much like you display in your last post above) are better weapons I think. But those are also tools you can't use unless you actually possess them. And when you start out with nothing more than purposeful hurtful speech it's hard to imagine you do.
Rock on, ol pal. Rock on.
post edited by yorolpal - 2011/06/19 18:40:43