To quote Kirby, "Who cares?".

Out of all the things I've posted on this forum, I've got to say that this phrase has potential to be the most often quoted.

It would be very different if [...] you'd publish something like a story of the conception of the book. Where did it go easy, where did you have to research a lot, where have you been frustrated by not reaching the kind of quality you aspire

Third person reference to the writer: apparently not everybody is aware of the meaning of this style of de-emphasising(!) the writer for the sake of emphasising the contents.

Since the author has learnt much while exploring and writing the contents, ...

[admin]
There are a handful of posts in this thread that are violating or at least skirting the TOS's admonition about not criticizing other members.
Please keep the TOS in mind.
Thanks,
JB
[/admin]

Third person reference to the writer: apparently not everybody is aware of the meaning of this style of de-emphasising(!) the writer for the sake of emphasising the contents. Maybe it is more common in formal texts (of science).

no other reviewer will be able to devolop the conclusion cited above

Of course, but this misses the point. In the book, I have included everything that I have learnt, is relevant and is on-topic. Therefore the reader (up to ca. 5 dan) can learn essentially the same of everything new (and everything on-topic I knew before). Other reviewers would not express what I have learnt but what they can learn.

In the book, I have included everything that I have learnt, is relevant and is on-topic. Therefore the reader (up to ca. 5 dan) can learn essentially the same of everything new (and everything on-topic I knew before). Other reviewers would not express what I have learnt but what they can learn.

This thread appears to be simply a distilled continuation of a thread that was sliding into a violation of the TOS.

Jasiek-bashing is not a wintertime sport on L19.

Such a discussion might be better continued by PM.

Because I care about RJ and his fantastic efforts to fill gaps in the English Go literature, I wanted to help him understand why his self reviews are counterproductive to his cause. That's really all. But after a while you remember again why you gave up on such attempts many times in the past and go back to "who cares" mode.

I don't understand all this criticism about a post that was meant to provide helpful information and clearly noted the conflict of interest. The battle to keep the internet clean and pure was lost a long time ago.

I don't understand all this criticism about a post that was meant to provide helpful information and clearly noted the conflict of interest. The battle to keep the internet clean and pure was lost a long time ago.

The fact that "conflict of interest" in its multifarious forms bleeds over into sectors where the voluntary ethic is supposed to predominate is no small thing.

..

The admin has no problem with the original post, nor do I, nor do several others who have spoken up in this thread. What is really going on here? Perhaps the first few posts were honest attempts to persuade Robert but the later ones are pure hounding.

...

If you think the TOS needs to cover conflicts of interest, please start another thread about it. If you think the admin was wrong to allow the original post, take it up with the admin.
...

I am confused by the warning to others about the TOS... Charles was addressing the ideas being discussed and I do not see how the comment would lead to locking the thread.