This is so off-topic I'm probably suspended next - sayonara, suckers. But I don't think the biggest crime at any discussion forum is being off-topic some of the time. I think the biggest crime is boring people to tears. Maurice may be mostly annoying but he's rarely dull. That's an achievement around here.
Next worst offence would be vicious personal attacks, which Maurice never stoops to, either. He uses some strong language - but there's no malice beneath. There are many people at SI who use perfectly civil language but only to mask venomous slurs and bitterness. Can't the SI censors tell the difference between being a genuine bastard and using off-beat humor? Even when it's really, really off? That's sad.
To put things in some perspective - Maurice was around in 1996, when the whole Nokia-Qualcomm debate began. Maurice picked up on some trends that very few people did at that point. I don't think he ended up being right about Nokia/Qualcomm combination strategy for the right reasons - but he ended up being right, just the same. To my bitter disappointment.
If you look at the 1996-2000 return on investment, Maurice's combo was obviously one of the brightest possible investment choices. So he has something most SI writers never attain - a track record. Far, far better than that of most professionals. Built on making largely unpopular choices, not piling on momentum picks.
There is much trash at SI. Couldn't the censors target people for being unoriginal, dull, small-minded momentum-chasers? That's the real crime around here. I wouldn't mind naming some names to start the ball running.
Crucially - Maurice is big enough to give credit to people he disagrees with. He doesn't tear down others to build himself up. That's genuine class - perhaps something that SI censors find hard to recognize. What would Jesus do? Probably decide that common decency and long-term return-on-investment balances out a lot of kooky behaviour.
Tero
|
