Date: Dec 14, 2012 7:33 PM
Author: GS Chandy
Subject: Re: Jo Boaler reveals attacks by Milgram and Bishop

Haim posted  Dec 15, 2012 1:23 AM (GSC's remarks interspersed):
>
> GS Chandy Posted: Dec 14, 2012 6:58 AM
>

> >I spent a good bit of time on reading that document.
> >
> >The prose is well-nigh unreadable.

>
> You meant to write, "the prose is well-nigh
> igh unreadable by me."
>

You're correct. That is precisely what I should have written. At least one other person (Greg Goodknight) seems to find Wayne Bishop's writing easily readable. I am the only person who has expressed reservations about reading (and understanding) Wayne Bishop's writing.
>
> While I expressed some quibbles over Wayne's
> e's strategy, I had no trouble reading his article.
> Which brings us back to the question you have been
> n dodging. Would the application of OPMS help you to
> understand Wayne's writing?
>

No. It would not. I have grave 'other' reservations about Wayne Bishop, which prevent me from applying OPMS effectively to his writing.

There has been no "dodging" of any question raised (see above and below as well as the responses made to your questions when you raised them).
>
> My writing?
>

No. It would not. I have grave 'other' reservations about you, which prevent me from applying OPMS effectively to your writing.
>
>Just about everybody else's writing?
>

As you would have realized, if you had ever troubled yourself to read anything about OPMS before persistently and consistently lying about it over a period of years:

OPMS is a general problem solving approach, which definitely can help almost anyone effectively identify problems and issues and tackle the issues identified. However, there is one proviso as the above "almost" indicates: The problem solver (the 'stakeholder') has to be minimally honest about his/ her/ their underlying motivations. Without this, OPMS cannot work.
>
> All of which you seem to have considerable trouble
> with.
>

This is entirely untrue, as you'd realize if you'd had the minimal honesty required of any stakeholder desiring to apply OPMS to issues. As you appear to lack that fundamental requirement, I should not expect you to realize this.

GSC
("Still Shoveling Away" - with apologies if due to Barry Garelick for any tedium caused; and with the observation that it's EASY to avoid all such tedium by the simple expedient of ignoring all messages purporting to originate from GSC)


Message was edited by: GS Chandy