TGJB,

"Your e-mails were about not attacking. You attacked me, unprovoked. This
is brain surgery? "

Again, my e-mails to you were about acknowledging, as this one
is("attacking" only had marginal relevance). I don't think of it as brain
surgery, I'm trying to understand your difficulty with it?

"outright stupidity"
"you and the other morons"

More non-personal attacks I suppose?

"I have not only talked about my years at Ragozin's many times here..."

I think that's as close as I'm going to get from you. It's generally on topic, but
not acknowledging.

" So who is taking false credit? "

This statement is sort of a back-handed acknowledgement in the form of a
question. You are correctly identifying that the issue raised is that of
"taking false credit" but you're doing it in a way in which your hands don't
appear dirty? Logically, whether Donaldson described a similar process in
the 30's or not, is an irrelevancy if Ragozin's father didn't work for
him(presumably he did not, nor did LR or LF,) or, if there's no reason to
believe they took their approach to figure-making from him. Unless, of
course, you are suggesting that you found the Donaldson source on your own, took it to the Ragozins, and they used it to generate their whole approach, and rushed it to press under their by-line, without giving you credit.

In any event, I don't suppose continuing this serves any purpose for either of us. For the record, personal attacks/name calling(as you've displayed here), the absence of acknowledgement of anothers' point of view, and the intellectual integrity issue of "taking false credit" are the essence of my objections. So far, my doubts are not assuaged, but I do appreciate the "airing."



.