ConFigures

Where are the snowdens of yesteryear?

I like to check the Talk pages of Wikipedia articles every now and then (especially when I’m going to link or otherwise refer to a given article). Sometimes they give a good idea of differences of opinion about the subject (including cites and pointers to broader theoretical/academic discussions), sometimes they alert me to possible factual errors that haven’t been corrected in the article yet, and sometimes they’re just funny. Witness the Talk:Knowledge Management page, where I came across this gem:
IN the meantime, if nothing else you made my day yesterday by saying that I (Dave Snowden) did not understand my own or Nonaka’s work in a public forum so thanks for that, I can use it!–Snowded 23:58, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Hunting through the comments, it appears Snowden is referring to the following exchange, before he started signing his Wikipedia talk page edits (new to the game):

For the record Snowden does reject Nonaka’s SECI model. The whole of this entry is very limited in its coverage of the field, and its somewhat naive and uncritical acceptance of the ideas of a limited number of thinkers in the field. It is an opinion piece of limited value and should be deleted or at least qualified to the effect that makes no attempt to survey or define the field.

(i) if you think this is what Snowden says (and I don’t agree with you from what I read of him - Frankly, I think you just don’t understand one or both of Snowden or Nonaka properly) then why don’t you provide links/references to back yourself up (ii) If you want to make bald statements without references, why do you think your view is not just another opinion and (iii) your assertion that the whole article is just an opinion piece of limited value is simply nonsense.

well as Snowden I think I have some valid opinion as what what I think.

When I mentioned this discovery to my friend Joe, he asked if I remembered a certain scene from Annie Hall …

“You, you know nothing of my work.” — Marshall McLuhan