Just curious

[crackers]

Yes, well in context to this thread I agree.

[Turner]

Theres a lot to be learned from TurboG. He didnt intend the learning to be quite this, but I will explain.

The first thing to note is that his suite of ideas and systems were in Blog form. This wasnt interactive either so it was more like reading a book rather than watching kids arguing in a chat room.

In this way, the idea was there to see without interuption.

I have missed many ideas here, more so over in CC roulette, when a post gets to 400 entries, including several changes, making it a strain to follow or pick up the thread when you look in after its been going for days.

Sometimes the contradictions are personal to the poster and the posters are desperate to ruin the post or prove the original poster doesnt know jack Shtt, score points againt, or just disrupt.

Secondly, with TurboG, each idea was explained, even if it was based on another idea.

Theres nothing worse than this: " I have this idea called Code 22. Just track same as divide and conquer, but use code 4 progression...then......."

Jesus.....what if I havnt read any of them? 400 posts in divide and conquer, with 5 different changes, and 7 lengthy arguments.

I think TurboG worked because he explained an idea well. No one was interupting and he was modest...which wasnt irratating.

No matter how we disregard TurboG, it was never his fault that no system works without falling into the black hole.

Turner

[Turner]

-