Here’s the synopsis of the whole soap opera. Check the LINKS posted under every paragraph, if you doubt what I write in there. (See how easy it is, panang?)

Gehrig was asked by someone why he no longer posts on the LVOL website. In his response, Gehrig also mentioned that the "authorities" there often dispensed advice and opinions about Blackjack that were absolutely flawed. LINK

I asked Gehrig if such flawed advice could also be found in the Blackjack websites of Wong or Snyder. And, in the same post, I teased Gehrig that he has ”the best fans in the whole world. They find [Gehrig’s] posts "witty" and "wise" and in the same breath they flat out say they cannot understand a word.” The joke was based on something that Queen!sm wrote in all innocence. But it set Gehrig’s pants on fire! LINK

Gehrig started on a tirade about “obtuse posts”, as if someone had accused him of writing such posts : ”As to obtuse posts.. All of us have some threshhold of intellect. Often I'm lost trying to follow a mathweenie "proof" on Reid's site. I *do* understand the concept and result. Should the poster be expected to "dumb down" his proof to enlighten me ? Not likely.” Right you are, Gehrig-o, and who said otherwise, right?

Strange reaction, wouldn’t you say?! Well, not as strange as it sounds. Gehrig has thinner skin than he makes it to be. He can’t really take in stride any jokes about his writing style, not even imaginary jokes. And he must really have a bigger difficulty than he lets out understanding Cant’s posts! Hence, the need to put some distance between that inability and his web persona. (Gehrig acts as if he’s in the closet.)

…It’s all down hill from then on. I respond to his reference to Cant saying that ”There's no one who has tried harder to understand Clarke Cant than me. I have gone as far as helping out a moderator of this website to edit Clarke's god damn Blackjack Formula to a reasonably readable text. No dice.” Which is true. I helped Zombie edit Clarke Cant’s text, a feat that earned Cant’s gratitude and the promise of editing royalties! Thanks, Clarke. But, still, I could not say in all honesty that I understood everything in it.LINK

Gehrig, pretending that I wrote something else than the above quote, started off on a wild rampage of accucations. I guess it was because I refused to play along with his omniscient web persona. Here’s the gist of the verbiage : ”You confuse the published, for profit texts, with discussions that dangle a thread of information. That would indicate that you cannot think out of the box, rather that you need some text to understand a new concept.” Wow, thanks, Gehrig, I didn’t know how perceptive you were, man!

I tried to explain to an obviously upset Gehrig that ”Clarke Cant posts *always* in a totally undecipherable manner, as if he is operating behind the Iron Curtain or something. And he does it *unintentionally*. Clarke Cant makes more sense when he posts about things really out there.” Which was of course nothing but an accurate, if somewhat playful, description of the unique Clarke Cant writing style, a style that when he posts about Math makes his text totally unintelligible. (I do understand my share of Mathematics, gentlemen. In fact, I understand more than I let out, and possibly more than dear Gehrig does. Still, Cant’s math are thicker to get into than the Amazon jungle. I could invoke MathProf, Kim Lee, et al, all befuddled as to what the XXXX Cant’s math mean, but the issue was not Cant nor the ability of Gehrig to understand his math.)

And so, after the soap opera, we proceed to our Tom & Jerry cartoon, whereby our resident Eastern Philosopher Tom Gehrig can’t have the last word/post in a thread! That’s all, folks.