The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » Education » math-teach

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: I agree with Susan
Replies: 1   Last Post: Jun 3, 1995 10:12 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]

Posts: 6
Registered: 12/6/04
I agree with Susan
Posted: Jun 3, 1995 6:58 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Fri, 2 Jun 1995, Dr. Susan Addington wrote:
> May I request that this Dan/Mike discussion be done privately in the

Mike replied:
>>Why is it that whenever the temperature rises a little bit, some people
start asking that things be made private? I tried to address this issue when
things heated up between Dan and "Steve" (Gary) to short-circuit exactly this
kind of response from Susan...This is supposed to be a place for us to
exchange ideas AND reactions regarding the Standards and math. ed. reform in
general. I don't see how that can be done meaningfully if the more heated
responses have to be private.<<

MY comments (for what they're worth):
Mike, here are some of the comments that were recently posted between
you two. Do you REALLY think that this kind of stuff represents an "exchange
of ideas AND reactions regarding the Standards and math. ed. reform" ??
(YOUR words!)

Jerry Taylor
> If my sarcasm is so evident, perhaps you should stop referring to my posts
and lying about what I've written in the past. Your method of baiting, then
feigning innocence while feverishly attacking a straw man is intellectually
dishonest at best. You know exactly what you're doing and that's why I
initially ignored your posts. Discussing issues with you is not productive.
> Beyond sarcasm,

Lying? That's rather extreme, Dan. Anyway, why not simply support your claims
with specifics (and I don't mean carefully edited examples, but rather the
entire original) so that others on the list can judge without your
interpretations mediating that judgment? I'd guess that you: A) feel abused
by me; B) suspect that my 'underhanded' techniques of argument are having an
impact on other members of the list; and C) are not sure how to overcome my
arguments, so you're choosing not to engage me in public. Of course, I may be
wrong about any or all of these conjectures.

Nonetheless, I think you've asked for engagement. Your confrontatory style
and outrageous over-generalizations are not going to go unopposed in any
intelligent forum. I'm sorry if you don't like my methods, but then again,
I'm not really too fond of yours, so I guess we're even.

I'm going to post this reply with your message on the list.


I engaged you interminably the last time our paths crossed and if you had
stuck to the issues I would have gladly engaged you again. However, your
first post was an absolute misrepresentation of my views and your second post
dealt mostly in personal attacks. I will not waste my time again trying to
have a discussion with you. It simply is not worth my time.

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.