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 have not lived long enough”

I was just trying to inject some self directed humor per my advanced age of 76, pursuing my 3rd (graduate) degree and having served two tours of duty during the Vietnam war..

I think the above more than qualifies myself as having “lived long enough”

And no Jerry, this has absolutely nothing to do with myself taking this personal.

When I first entered history grad school, the first thing I learned was very humbling: finding out that I was not as great researcher as I self perceived.

Since beginning my studies, I have learned correct research methodogy, however I am nowhere at my goal.

I have learned how important the peer review process is.

I have learned the operational definition of what a valid historical perspective is.

If a Historian submits a term paper for peer review, and I do not accept the feedback and incorporate that feedback into a rewrite


That would be an example of taking things personal.

If I ask a resource if a historical perspective is valid, and I reject the feedback, that would be an example of taking it personally.

In summary, some historians would not fair very well in a graduate history program if they are going to argue with resource feedback and argue with the peer review process asking for a rewrite.

So Jerry, your post is not accurate. It has nothing to do with me taking anything personally.

I have to not be defensive and not taking anything personal if I want to be successful