Ed Miller/Gary Carson debate

[Lou Krieger]

[ QUOTE ]
I seriously doubt this will go anywhere, but what exactly is the debate supposed to be over? Personal issues? (Who said what about who?) Professional? (Who gets credit for what concepts that went into a book?) Technical? (Who is right and who is wrong about the FTOP?)

Even if a debate took place, live radio doesn't seem like a good venue. It would be better to allow more time for thoughtful replies. But even then, a debate would likely resolve nothing because the issues are so emotionally charged.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your post raises some good and valid issues, and even though there will be no debate, I do want to respond to the points you raised.

If a debate was to happen and I was to act as moderator, I'd set the guidelines only after consulting with the two principals; I wouldn't seek to impose my own rules on them. Since I have not had this discussion with either Mr. Miller or Mr. Carson, I can't describe either the content or format of a debate that will never take place.

But from a philosophical perspective, if two people are going to debate, I believe they need substantial input into the structure and format.

My only requirement would be that personal issues be kept out of it.

While radio does not allow for lengthy, thoughtful responses, I don't know a format other than print -- and that's not really a "debate" -- that provides an opportunity to cogitate before responding.

The fact that there are emotionally charged issues doesn't stop political debates from being interesting, and shouln't preclude a high level of interest here.

Having said all that, it's clear that Ed does not want to debate, and that's OK. I'm not sure Gary Carson is interested in debating either. In fact I have not discussed the issue with him at all.

So it's not going to happen, but I did want to thank you for the issues you raised, and wanted to take the time to respond to them.