I'm bored with you
Posted on 02/12/2009 7:05:57 AM PST by GonzoII
>Encyclopedia of Christian Civilization is “too Christian”?
>
>The late great George Putnam was right......we are living in the age of insanity.
Agreed.
>I’ve been complaining for years that the Encyclopedia of Mathematics has too many numbers in it but nobody listens.
ROFL!
You seem to think that I was saying that authors never initiate book proposals with publishers. That’s not at all what I was saying. It is the normal way of doing things-when an author has a book in mind, of course, he’ll pitch it to a publisher. Even a book of essays written by a half-dozen or a dozen scholars may be proposed to a publisher by the person who organized the group.
But that’s not true of the sort of reference work Kurian edited. I’ve been involved with dozens of these reference works where hundreds of authors are involved. With very few exceptions they are initiated by the publisher because they have been easy to market to libraries.
Your examples are apples to the oranges I was referring to.
No, that’s not at all what I’m talking about. I’m referring to a gentleman I work with who is a University Professor and has done projects the same way this article describes. I think the problem is you fancy yourself an expert that must be right about all things. This is getting pointless, so I’ll save us some time.
What you called apples an oranges was an attempt, probably a poor one, to get you off the wrong track and show you that I’ve been trying to establish a difference between my writing and my colleagues. I contacted him and he said it would be quite common for a project like this to already be in some form and the scholar then approach a publisher. He would find it more odd that a publisher would seek someone out to do a work on this, especially on Christianity. But, who knows.
Blackwells has an active program soliciting these projects. The editor named in the story, Rebecca Harkin, was in charge of soliciting such projects from academics.
You said that Kurian said he initiated it. I asked for your evidence. The evidence you provided says no such thing. Then you started in with “well but . . . “ and offered single-volume monographs as your basis. Those are apples compared to encyclopedia oranges.
But you won’t let go of it.
Okay,I give up.
The numbers never bothered me, but the equations...
No, you are too stubborn to try and understand what I was saying. An example of just such scenario is the Bible translation employer worked on with several academics. They approached a publisher and pitched the idea. I was simply trying to get you to understand that his situation was different than my own, which you kept trying to say I was using as an example. I used it to describe what I was talking about, but later explained the difference between myself and the gentleman I’m referring to. You have an ego so huge, you can’t fathom that things don’t work just as you’ve seen them work. They do in fact at times work just as Kurian described, therefor it is POSSIBLE that he is not lying. THat was my only point. Your ego won’t let you admit that thought, so pout of and be right. Arrogant people drive me nuts.
From the beginning I stated that in most cases the author approaches the publisher but that in most cases of large multivolume encyclopedias the publisher approaches a leading academic with a proposal.
I never denied that authors approach publishers. I said that it is uncommon in this sort of work.
You come back with instances of non-encyclopedia projects in which the author approached the publisher and claim that this proves my general statement wrong.
You claimed to have evidence from the article that Kurian said he approached the publisher. But the lines you quoted merely said that he worked with the publisher.
People work with the publisher on every publishing project, regardless whether the publisher approached the author or the author approached the publisher.
From the beginning I acknowledged that it was possible that Kurian indeed took initiative on this, possible, but unlikely. That’s all I said.
So far you have not offered one shred of evidence to the contrary.
If you can offer clear evidence that Kurian initiated this project, fine. Like I said, it’s possible but not as common as the other way around.
My original point was that Kurian’s description of what happened sounds incomplete. It’s rare for a project to come in a year ahead of schedule and take only 2 years with 400 authors. You countered that perhaps he had pitched the project to the publisher and had it half done already.
Fine. As I said from the beginning, that’s possible but very unlikely. So far you have offered nothing to make me think otherwise.
It has nothing to do with my ego. It has to do with evidence and you’ve offered none, merely speculation based on apples that don’t match the oranges at issue here.
I don’t know how to make it more plain.
Actually your entire obsession with this has been that it never happens that way. You did in fact argue that. I can’t keep up with your changing story, and don’t have time to read a book each time you need to change it. Now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time-uh. I fart in your general direction. ;)
Here's what I wrote in post # 16 about who takes initiative in these projects, usually
From post # 16
“Most of these “dictionaries” or “encyclopedias” arise from publishers contacting academics.”
“So usually the idea comes from the publisher who contacts a likely academic to propose that he edit the particular encyclopedia or handbook. This case may be different”.
“I don’t know what happened. But overall, it sounds to me like there’s more to the story. That’s all. More to the story.”
I never used the term never when referring to the question you raised in your post # 9.
However, in my first post on this thread, # 5, I did use the word never, but in an entirely different context:
“They never come in a year ahead of time after only 2 years. Now, in this case, Kurian may have done an exceptionally good job of riding herd on his contributors and pulled off a remarkable feat of editing. If so, he deserves praise.”
“The editorial boards for these projects never routinely review all articles.”
“I lean toward finding Kurian’s account credible, but I’d urge a bit of caution.”
I see...Kinda like Kurian never even said he had approached the publisher and not the other way around (because you couldn’t find it in the article). Right, and there was never an argument about whether the publisher is ever contacted by the academic and not the other way around. Never happened. You never argued about that through several posts, because there is a delicate ego to be protected. I’m not saying you didn’t change your mind several times. :) hehe. Yooooou didn’t see aaaaanything.....nothing to see here. It’s just drivin ya nuts that someone won’t let you fix it and be right, isn’t it. I’m just having fun torturing you and making you stay in reality. People like you don’t get that much, and it’s good for you. Builds character.
“I see...Kinda like Kurian never even said he had approached the publisher and not the other way around (because you couldn’t find it in the article)”
You are the one who affirmed that he said that he had approached the publisher. The evidence you offered for that claim made no such claim.
“Right, and there was never an argument about whether the publisher is ever contacted by the academic and not the other way around. Never happened.”
Did I deny there was an argument? You keep developing straw-men. Of course you and I have been arguing about who contacts whom.
What I denied in my last post was that I ever said that an author “never contacts the publisher.” You accused me of saying that authors never contact publishers. I denied it. I did not deny that we are having an argument.
You are incapable of accurately representing what your interlocutor says. Ego has nothing to do with it.
Go argue with yourself.
Sure could have fooled me. I thought you were obsessed with talking past me. I’m relieved you are only bored.
Happy boredom to you. Goodbye.
LOL! Oh yeah, well.... I know you are, but what am I? Sad sad. A sense of humor would do wonders for you.
ping
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.