Joey, I know that you later edited your original post, but by that time two people had already responded and quoted the original text, so I hope you don't mind that I respond in kind? It's in the spirit of good intentions, trust me.
No offense taken Sean. I guess your post deserves a response from my perspective.
I appreciate that you took time out to respond, Joey. And I feel I owe you an explanation of what I was getting at, based on some things I see in your original text.
Lou has denigrated and ridiculed good and decent people on this forum, FOR YEARS, simply because they have different beliefs than he does and I am fairly sure that you have NEVER admonished him for his despicable behavior. Why? I don't know.
That bolded part is one of those things that I wanted to address right out in the open, because primarily, that statement is 100% untrue. I'm not sure if it's because of a point-purpose selective/biased memory, or just forgetting certain instances have happened because the quantity of them may not've met a "critical mass" or threshold for long-term memory.
Fact: Lou and I have had it out here, in the Main forum, and in the 14.1 forum, on numerous occasions. A couple instances that stand out: Lou's deification of Willie Mosconi, Lou's stubborn refusal to admit that Mosconi had a slip stroke (evident to anyone that watches video archives), arguments to what cue ball was used at 14.1 events, Lou's downtrodding write-up of the SBE he attended and the management of the 14.1 Challenge event, and a little instance where Mr. Wilson himself had to warn Lou about some really nasty comments he made to me in response to what I thought were obvious playful ex-Navy guy -to- ex-Air Force guy portrayals of each other's service. (In other words, playful banter that could be heard around any military water cooler, that he took personally.)
Some of the comments put by Lou in my direction were really nasty and over the top. In some of the instances, his point and stance was
100% correct, and if other than for the language used, I would normally concede gracefully.
I once made the analogy that Lou's favorite move / parting shot, is when he feels he wants to put a capper or coup de gras on his point, he turns his back to you, and as he's walking away, he flings a spinning machete over his shoulder, which you find embedded in the crown of your head.
Here's the point I make: so what? Let's capitalize that. SO WHAT?
That's his way. You have your way. I have my way. Everyone has his/her way. Everyone has his/her own idiosyncracies, which they may -- or may not(!) -- know is not everyone else's normal way of dealing with things. Lou may know he's caustic in many instances. But in some ways, so are YOU. And, I admit, I can be caustic at times as well.
I try to be the best human being I can be, while still defending my values. But I find as I get older, countering causticity with more causticity does no one good. In fact, there's a lot of collateral damage when that stuff splashes around.
You can still defend your values and be a good human being at the same time. The trick is to pick your battles. And, when to just close your eyes, and say to yourself, "this ain't worth it," and move on -- even without a reply.
There's too much of this "stake in the ground" nonsense here. And over what -- a freakin' way to aim a pool shot?
Sean, you're a decent guy. Even if you disagree with someone you don't take the disagreement to the point of intentionally trying to ridicule someone over what they believe or practice. You may disagree with someone but you get your point across and leave it alone. That's what a gentleman does.
Thank you, Joey. That means a lot. This is my point, btw. One can be a great debater in a forum setting without having to resort to that bucket of caustic liquids. I strive to be that way, although I may not always be successful.
Lou isn't a gentleman unfortunately, despite the front that he puts on for most of us and he has been given the opportunity to be one.
Actually I think it is more than that. He has been given the opportunity to be a friend by more than one person on this forum but he prefers to be a forum bully and a self-righteous, pompous ass, more than to get along with people.
Sorry, but Lou has made his bed and he likes it this way. He doesn't apologize for his ways, doesn't plan to change his despicable behavior and that's just Lou.
I guess after all these years I am glad to see Lou getting just a little bit of what he has been giving others for years.
I think what is particularly funny is Lou came into my town much like John did in St. Louis, when I wasn't at my pool room and couldn't wait to get back to his laptop to spread rumors about anything negative about me that he could find.
Lou is a gossiper and a person who spins the truth to meet his own agenda and his agenda is often an intention to hurt or injure.
He's just getting a little bit of what he has been giving others for all these years. I guess it's overdue.
One question to you, Joey -- is this all worth it? I mean, you disagree with Lou, Dave (SpiderWebComm) disagrees with Lou, John Barton disagrees with Lou, Stan disagrees with Lou, ...ad nauseam. There are two common denominators in the above:
1. Lou
2. You
(I'm not talking about the others, btw -- only you and your part in all this.) Only *one* of those two common denominators above is one you have control over. Can you guess which one it is?
My point is it should be glaringly obvious by now that you are not going to "change" Lou or his stance on those topics you disagree over (e.g. aiming systems). Yet, you keep on, and on, and on. You (and the others, btw) are like little wind-up or RC toys that, when they meet a wall, instead of changing direction and going around the wall, you instead back up, go forward crashing into the wall, back up, go forward crashing again into the wall, etc., over and over.
It's very easy to point the finger at Lou and blame him for his audacity, causticity, etc. But you know that old saying about when you make a fist and form your hand to point a finger in blame at someone, where are the other three fingers pointing?
In a way I'm sorry to say that I'm most likely fanning the flames. I'll bow out unless there is additional reasons to respond. I thought you deserved a response.
JoeyA
I *do* appreciate the follow-up and the time you put into this, Joey, and please understand it's for the purposes of taking the opportunity to address a couple key points that would've otherwise been lost if I'd responded only to the edited version.
While the forums may look to this as a blessing -- culminating in an "Internet Death Match" of the caliber not seen since OMGWTF-vs-Cubc -- you really do have to question the silliness of all this. Only *one* of the two common denominators mentioned a couple paragraphs above needed to exercise a bit of "full stop" control, and things would've been halted in their tracks. Yeah, an Internet Death Match over disagreements about aiming systems. This takes the playground-ish "my Dad is better than your Dad -- wanna fight me and see?" to a new level of silliness.
Still, I count myself as one who wants to see this match, because I LOVE one pocket! Too bad it couldn't be an all-around, with some 14.1 thrown in. That would make it really interesting.
-Sean
I guess the 'powers that be' on this forum, know a real full time, miserable, insulting, 'gentleman', when they see one !...
..Now theres an area, where you could give Lou some BIG WEIGHT !...You usually have about 3 or 4 "name calling" wars going at once...You may not have noticed, because you have so many [sic] friends)
)
