Her dialogue is anything but threatening. On the contrary, it's rather impossible to take seriously. It's a word choice you've applied for flattery.
There are two kinds of people in this field of interest. There are those that gather as much primary, untainted information as they can and allow those resources to guide their understandings. And there are those that filter every piece of information through their partialities and force square pegs of information into round holes of an agenda. One of these is constructive, the other is destructive. I respect the former, and have great contempt for the latter. That's not personal, that's not insecurity, it's objective. Someone being nice doesn't change that. Sadly some people in this field will ignore poor academic conduct simply because they like the person (or in some cases the person can benefit them in some way). I'm not mixing these two things at all. I call 'foul' based entirely on the behavior displayed. You incorrectly chalk that up to being 'threatened' and more absurdly attribute it up to 'insecurity'. My allegiance is to the information at hand, not my ego or affirmation from anyone here. I'd also suggest refraining from psycho-analyzing someone you don't know. Your chance of being right is as remote as you guessing their birth date.
about Mike's penchant for personalizing. Unfortunate. Don't know Mike personally so can only generalize that in my experience the tendency, along with that of defensiveness, oft-times can be chalked up... more
More manipulation — Mike Mihaljevich,Sat May 20 23:21
not bothered to read or simply have not processed the content of the various posts here Mike concerning this subject. Why that should be the case, I hesitate to say--you certainly have had more than enough... more
Hey Olds, Some years ago, at a TTR event, I remember one of the speakers: a retired professor of history, mentioned that... .."The legend" is a very important part of history. (or words to that... more
Legend, myth, folktale, fable, even unexamined "conventional wisdom," whichever word or idea is the correct one, it certainly can spur or inspire researchers to pursue "the real story." In my own line... more
Olds, for some reason after reading your post, I immediately had a fractured remembrance of either Buffalo Bill Cody or Wild Bill Hickok during a stage career which included having to wear an outrageous... more
I do know Mike, personally. He is a passionate, enthusiastic and dedicated researcher who I believe, is very frustrated with much of the modern historical writing. He is trying to right the wrongs as... more
Mike seems to compare a tenured university professor resource’s modus operandi to a cardboard cut-out or a guy in a television marketing ad dressed up as a doctor wearing a stereoscope. What’s with the... more
BJ, it seems that you were pretty much in agreement with much of what Mike was saying early on. Even after his post Missed My Meaning in which he said "It's not over the top because it's not true...a... more
So Jerry, I’m not sure why you feel the need to defend Mike? He can advocate for himself. The post you referred to is being taken out of context. My post was in response to mike claiming that “I... more
Up with rapprochement. My only comment would be, if Mike is frustrated, as am I, if surely to a less passionate extent, with those who are "continually printing the legend," then I would think that... more
Hey Olds, your negation of: .."Didn't know that Billy, about Mike's penchant for personalizing" ...seems to contrast with your recent, deeply entrenched downstream post per the topic of Mike....... more
I was referring to not knowing that Mike had a PENCHANT for or PATTERN of personalizing. Obviously, I knew that he did with Joyce, but reckoned that was a one-off. It was when you added that he had done... more