Seriously....?
I mean, you could say that to some of us and I'd get it.
But Bob? Really?
The lack of professionalism
- Thread starter Drop The Rock
- Start date
Seriously....?
I mean, you could say that to some of us and I'd get it.
But Bob? Really?
This comment above brought up a very good and valid point!
What difference does it make "WHO IT IS?" why is it ok to say that to "Some of us" but some people are "UNTOUCHABLE" ???
You can't disagree with "so and so" really???
My comment was not mean spirited or disrespectful in any way. But, your post and opinion is that I am out of line. Talk about double standard in public opinion around here. It is rampant!
KD
C'mon. No one is above reproach.
Still, it is very easy to hold some in higher regard than others. That isn't a double standard. That is respect.
I would hold something Bob says in higher regard than many here. Mike Howerton. Jay Helfert. RandyG. Many, many others. Oft times in regards to their area of expertise, not necessarily in other areas. Then again, those folks tend to not speak in an outrageous fashion, nor outside their area of expertise, which is reflective of them.
That doesn't mean I automatically agree with anything or everything they say, and I've had disagreements with some of those I mentioned, and many others. That doesn't diminish their position, in my eyes.
I'm quite certain that there are people in this world who you regard higher than others. I would be stunned to hear you say otherwise.
This is the only time I've ever seen Bob say anything about anyone on this forum, in a negative manner. And I felt that he was being quite restrained, at that.
GODDAMN IT PHILLY!!! LOL. I AM NOT DEFENDING HIM! Do I have to link the threads and posts were I got into it with him. He wasn't the point of this at all. Please refer back to my original post. I'm using him as an example because he is banned and therefore I don't have to create another war between two active posters. EVERYONE else me, Beiber, you, dub, etc. are here for knowledge and entertainment. We can get into it with him and if people don't like it meh, whatever. We aren't trying to represent a business on here though are we. My point is some of the entrepreneurs on here have attitudes that will catch up with them. Some I just ignore because their products are tried and true and they aren't that bad. Others I'd punch in the face if they said half of the stuff to me that they have on here.
My point is that arguing with someone like Rick is a lose lose situation for everyone but especially for anyone who has skin in the industry.
Here someone gave me a greenie for this one: http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=5533847&postcount=130
Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. If your competitors were telling your potential customers things that were not true about their products and services then you should have a duty to your customers and your employees to set the record straight.
I get the kumbaya sentiment but the fact is that it's simply not true in business that you never talk bad about the competition. I have studied a lot of company histories, studied a lot of marketing campaigns and a lot of them directly compared products and called out competitors on their claims.
I feel like you only lose credibility if what you say has no validity. I show our customers what we do, how we build our cases and invite them to try and tear them apart. Then I say go ask anyone else if you can try this with their cases.
So anyone who claims that their cases are just as strong is not being truthful unless they can prove it. And if not then they should be called on it.
Maybe I should have been more clear. Bad mouthing without validity is part of what I was referring to.
The point was is that Bob is a mechanical engineer that has more than 3 years of physics education lol. Rick has on more than one occasion berated him, Dave and Mike Page. Sometimes in small passive agressive ways, other times in big ways
That part in red was extremely honest and I respect that. I respect that post alot! I do have one other thing that comes to mind on the topic. Why is he negative on Rick??? Is it the content? Is it his friendship with Rick's opponents?
I do not know the answer to that question? Not that it makes any difference.
KD
Sorry, my bad. Even when he goes away he won't go away.
Again, this isn't a situation of "Rick's Friends" vs "Rick's Enemies". It truly isn't.
I've pointed out to you that Rick got on the bad side of PJ, JB, Lou and Neil. That is not exactly a close-knit clique. There are many, many, many, MANY long-time AZB members who have had this experience, some of whom won't post here any longer because of Rick and others like him. These are people that don't all group themselves together, seeing who they can pick on next.
I've not seen Bob post in any sort of manner that indicates he's "siding" with anyone. I believe he is friendly with Dr. Dave, as they have done many projects together, so perhaps him, in a scientific context. I maintain that I've never seen Bob be cross with anyone here. He always brings a professional and clinical approach to whichever subject he takes the time to actually comment on here. And he's always respectful, even to Rick.
I'm taking it from your posts that you truly have not experienced the "full Rick". I appreciate that you want to allow for the opposite view point of any given situation, but I promise you, this was no witch hunt. Not a case of bullying "poor Rick." He brought this upon himself. Many of us have tried reasoning with him in the past, if only to have a civil discussion. He wasn't receptive to that, and turned that into a much bigger conflagration. I'm still not convinced that it wasn't an elaborate online persona, or if he was really that far out there, which is why I held back arguing with him for a long time.
Have a good night.
Electrical, from UC Berkeley. I first attended Cal (other than for summer programs) in 1964 and last attended in 1984. Some of us are slow learners.
As for the OP subject, I have to admit that I'm very surprised by some of the posts that people in the billiard business make here. They would make me reluctant to do business with them if I had a need for their product or service. I'm sure they lose some potential customers due to their posts.
It's obvious you haven't read much of his posts, or only skimmed the ones you did read. Here's just one example- according to him, a pendulum stroke HAS to have a big arc up at the back of the stroke, and at the end of the stroke. Also, he claims that a pendulum stroke can never be level at any time. Yet, when Greg Cantrall made a little machine to simulate a pendulum stroke, it was found that the cue was level from about an inch before contact to several inches after contact within .001". Rick then spent hundreds and hundreds of posts arguing that is not level. It's more level than most tables, but not level enough to be called level by anyone. There are literally dozens more that could be posted, but I'm not doing your research for you.
When 80% or better of the instructors on here have stated that he doesn't know what he is talking about, and only ONE instructor has ever agreed with him, that should tell you something. Namely, you are backing the wrong guy.
Simple Definition of pendulum
: a stick with a weight at the bottom that swings back and forth inside a clock
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pendulum
Simple Definition of swing
: to move backward and forward or from side to side while hanging from something
: to move with a smooth, curving motion
: to move (your arm, a tool, etc.) with a quick, curving motion especially to try to hit something
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/swing
by definition and definition alone it is truly impossible!
Can you minimize the swing to time the bottom and get level to .001 sure! but, based on the definitions above you could understand his argument! i hope?
KD
No, I can not. Nor can I understand anyone else agreeing with him on it. Do you really agree with him on it, or are you just trying to create some drama on here??
Where are the engineers for this?
The pendulum creates an "ARC" The bottom of the arc is when it is closest to the ground due to gravity. But, it occupies that distance closest to the ground and when the string has the most gravitational force exerted on the swinging object!
It is science not an argument.
KD
Attachments
I'm thinking KD IS English. It gets weirder and weirder.
KD is not English. This we know.
First- No dog in this fight
Second- I absolutely agree with Bob. What more of a turn off to the up and coming player or beginner than to hear some of the non-sense and smart-alic AND UNWARRANTED responses from some of the most "respected" Professionals. Class goes a long, long way. I also agree with John, if it's warranted, let it rip, brother. Alot of these professionals have worked too damn hard to get where they are to be abused, and their livelihood depends on the reputation of their product(s).
At the risk of wandering farther off-topic....
For those who might be interested in that thread, see http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=331440
A pendulum stroke is a stroke where the elbow does not move, or moves very little before contact. (and preferably after contact through the finish of the stroke) That is why it is called a pendulum stroke. Now, do you really think that a pendulum stroke perfectly mimics a pendulum as shown in your diagram?
Ask yourself this- do you really want to be "that" person? The person that fills in for Rick while he isn't here?