Re: Wolf With the Red Roses

On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 11:07:34 -0800, "Juba" <juba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Joe B <mong-gu-di-fu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message:
4ejmk3p84v9djvs7rglbhqporhhoa2jaij@xxxxxxx,

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 20:43:22 GMT, Mike Berkowitz
<mkberk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 11:31:33 GMT, "Joe_Z" <Joe_Z@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Don't believe so but he's good at 'cut & paste' I'm sure...Joe

"Mike Berkowitz" <mkberk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message news:l8ljk3db6de4q2jgf46j4okjp0j6jskk8c@xxxxxxxxxx
Are you or have you ever been a healthcare professional of some
sort?


Mike


Either he is good (and fast) at researching issues and compiling
replies or he is connected to healthcare in some capacity or both.

Mike


It is interesting that you see that, Mike. When I first saw your
message I figured this was the reason you were asking and since I did
not feel the same I went back about two weeks and read or re-read his
posts to see if I gleaned that from his messages.
I did not.
Anybody else care to comment on this?

As far as I know he has never worked in the healthcare field. Not that
this is any of our business, but he was something like a director of
information systems on his last job and is now working as a consultant.

Though he and I have had our differences and it did get quite ugly in
the past, I have always considered him a valuable asset to this
newsgroup and I told him so even during the worst of it. His answers
about healthcare and medicines are almost always good, so I don't really
care whether he looks stuff up or not. The only thing he does wrong with
that is that oftentimes he doesn't cite his sources. I think that's
wrong and we had a debate about that in the past. He seems to think it's
not necessary. Some people think he's trying to be a know-it-all, and
I'm sure there is an element of that at work but I'm inclined to accept
his explanation as the main reason.

The off-topic discussions are another matter. I think his politics can
best be described as Darwinian. He figures he got his piece of the
American Dream through hard work and having the drive to overcome any
obstacles in his way (including chronic pain) and so he figures anyone
who doesn't do that really has no one to blame but themselves. He is
often full of bluster and self-importance, which I attribute to him
emulating the right-wing talk show hosts that he admires. He likes the
right-wing brand of mean-spirited politics.

As I said before, he and I have had our differences. But we've had a
truce going for a while. There was nothing negotiated, it just happened,
and as long as he refrains from making personal attacks on me I will do
the same.

He was a much bigger *** in the past, and so was I. That history
sometimes influences people's perceptions of the things we say, to where
sincere offerings of help and advice are not seen in the way it is
intended.

Add to that the fact that there are a couple of people who spend a lot
of time via email attempting to turn others against us by reciting their
own twisted version of past history, portraying themselves as innocent
victims, and interpreting the things we say in the most negative way
possible. Many of the people they write to don't realize that these
people are pursuing an agenda because they really appreciate the genuine
support and compassion that is also being offered. They are (irony
intended), "wolves in sheep's clothing" and at least some folks are wise
to what is going on because that's how I know about it.

Unfortunately they do have some people so completely snowed that they
are predisposed to interpret everything we say in the most negative way
possible.

I think the people who poke at him bring out the worst in him. These
days, more often than not, he is not the one who starts an unpleasant
exchange, but is reacting to what someone else has said about him
without any real provacation, except perhaps for their misreading his
intent in something he said. When provoked he can be quite nasty.

Those same people who engage in character assassination via email will
interpret this as me defending him. I am not defending his excesses any
more than I would anyone else's. I'm simply telling it like it is. He
has his flaws and he has made his share of mistakes, but on balance he
is an asset to the group. He should not be poked at by those who seem to
have a never-ending hard-on for him, because that only makes him worse.


As I indicated to Legend, I guess I miss a lot, Juba. I always figured
that there is an email circuit behind the scenes, so-to-speak, but, I
did not know that things are so serious.
Anyway, from your reply I did pick-up one suggestion and that is to
cite the source when I post information. A great deal of the stuff I
post that is informational comes from books or the net. I have a good
collection of medical books as I've been a 1st year medical student
for about 35 years. I never intended to fool anyone - someone asks and
I provide my best attempt at the right answer. However, it is a good
concept to let the reader know where the info came from.

.

Quantcast