Originally Posted by elucidate
I think he is free to declare his oppinions about what he considers other peoples goals to be, I just don't think it is ok to make them set in stone as what a crappy goal actually is, which is how it seemed to me in his newsletter, that's all.
My point is it is up to each person to decide what a crappy goal and what an awesome goal is. People can read his newsletter and agree with his oppinion of what a crappy goal is of course, and then they are also free to say "well, that doesn't seem like a crappy goal to me...that seems like an awesome goal to me"
Of course they are free to agree or disagree. So then how is it not ok for Steve to fully express his evaluations about others (with which people are free to agree or disagree) in his own newsletter, but ok for you to fully express your evaluations (with which people are free to agree or disagree) on a public forum?
What is the not ok-ness about it?