Here is a summary of what has been said in this long thread thus far.
Spark clearly states his accusations in the first few posts of this thread. If you haven't done so yet, you should read those first posts.
The rebuttals which have been advanced thus far fall into 21 categories. Here is each rubuttal and the counter-argument to it:
1) Spark is a <insert favorite derogatory term here>
Maybe Spark is a dirty, rotten scoundrel (or whatever other term you want to use), but that doesnt matter because Spark has been very careful to back up every one of his accusations with apparently-credibly, apparently-conclusive, documentary evidence. The compelling nature of his accusations and the truth of his accusations do not rest upon Sparks character; they rest upon that evidence. Attacking Sparks character does not address the accusations or take them off the table.
2) Spark was wrong for having brought this up.
Maybe, but that doesnt matter now because it IS brought up now. The compelling nature of Sparks accusations and the truth of his accusations speak for themselves. Attacking how the accusations got on the table does not take them off the table.
3) Spark was wrong to have handled this issue in such a directly-confrontational way.
Maybe Spark was wrong to have handled it like he did. How it was brought up doesnt matter because it is brought up. The compelling nature of his accusations and the truth of his accusations do not rest upon Sparks judgment or actions; they rest upon the evidence. Attacking Sparks judgment or actions does not address the accusations or take them off the table.
4) Spark should have handled this privately, not publicly like this.
Maybe, but the accusations are on the public table now. But, again, the issue here is not sparks judgment. The issue is the accusations and the evidence that supports them. Arguing about how Spark chose to handle this does not take the accusations and the evidence off the table.
One can argue that the key accusation that Spark makes against Mr. Strider, that he continuously misrepresents his military service and background, is something that Mr. Strider does very publicly. So, in some respects, maybe it is appropriate for Spark to raise the issue publically.
5) Spark offered to pay Kevin McClung -- and maybe others -- for dirt on Mr. Strider. Thats not ethical.
Maybe that is a little underhanded or even questionably ethical. But, the compelling nature of his accusations and the truth of his accusations do not rest upon Sparks ethics; they rest upon the evidence. How Spark got that evidence is not nearly as important as the veracity of that evidence. Attacking Sparks ethics or actions does not address the accusations or the evidence or take them off the table.
6) Spark is doing this because of business competition with Mr. Strider, professional jealousy, or because of some personal vendetta against him
because of some business issue in the past.
Maybe that is true, but Sparks motives arent at issue here. Why Spark brought it up doesnt matter because it is brought up. The compelling nature of his accusations and the truth of his accusations do not rest upon Sparks motives; they rest upon the evidence. Attacking Sparks motives does not address the accusations or take them off the table.
7) This is all just a bunch of b.s.
Were that it were so easily dismissed. But Spark has been very careful to back up every one of his accusations with apparently-credibly, apparently-conclusive, documentary evidence. The result is that these accusations do not appear to be rumors or hearsay.
8) This is all just old stuff. Its all been covered in the past.
Maybe. But that doesnt mean that it shouldnt be covered again if it hasnt been answered in the past. Spark has given a concise, consolidated presentation of accusations that have been circulating and rumored for a long time. But accusations dont go away with age. They go away when they are addressed completely.
9) This is all just a witch hunt.
A "witch hunt" is based on slight, doubtful, or irrelevant evidence, hearsay, unsubstantiated rumors, baseless speculation, vague suspicions and raised-eyebrow innuendoes. Spark has been very careful to back up every one of his accusations with apparently-credibly, apparently-conclusive, documentary evidence. The compelling nature and the truth of his accusations rest upon that evidence.
10) This is all just a bunch of USN, Badlands, Bladeforums cross-forums bickering!
Not one of Sparks accusations even mentions USN, Badlands, or Bladeforums. Sparks accusations and the evidence that supports them are not against Mr. Strider, not against USN or Badlands
11) Strider knives are great knives and Strider Knives is a great company.
True. But thats not whats at issue here. None of Sparks accusations say otherwise. The broad agreement here is that Strider knives are well-designed and well-made and fully combat-worthy and that Strider Knives is a great company, an American manufacturing company, and a job creator.
12) Mike Strider is a nice, friendly, charitable man.
That may very well be true. Many posters here have enumerated his good deeds. But thats not whats at issue here. None of the accusations say that he isnt friendly or charitable. That can not excuse habitually, continuously, and presently misrepresents indeed, it would appear, radically exaggerates himself and his background and knowingly allows other to so as well which is what Spark has accused him of.
13) What about Kevin Mad Dog McClung or Lynn Thompson or whoever else?
They may have problems of their own, but they are not the issue that Spark has raised. Spark has carefully presented a series of serious accusations against Mr. Strider. Spark has carefully backed each one up with apparently-credibly, apparently-conclusive, documentary evidence. The wrongdoings of others can not excuse any wrongdoings of Mr. Strider.
14) Just about all of us have something in our past that were not proud of. Why does what happened decades ago matter today?
Sparks charges are really not so much about Mr. Striders past as they are about Mr. Striders present and apparently continuous practice of misrepresenting indeed, it would appear, radically exaggerating that past. Spark charges that Mr. Strider lies to the industry and community each and every day even until today. That is not something that is deep and buried in the past. What Spark alleges that Mr. Strider lies about may be decades-old, but Spark alleges that the lies themselves are very present and on-going.
It appears that Mr. Strider has not, himself, put his past behind him but very much wears his past or at least a highly-embellished version of it very prominently every day. By frequently bringing his past up, Mr. Strider himself makes his past a very present subject of current discussion.
If a man claims to be a specially-qualified heart surgeon by virtue of his education and his past work, then that mans education and work history, his past, becomes a legitimate topic for discussion. Spark asserts that Mr. Strider implies that his past gives him some special qualification as a knife designer and maker which makes his past a legitimate topic of discussion. When Mr. Strider chooses to use his past as a credential for his current work, then he, himself, makes his past a legitimate topic of discussion.
15) What does the background of a knife maker matter? He makes great knives!
Refer to item thirteen above. A knife makers background really doesnt matter much unless he, himself, chooses to use it as a credential for his current work.
16) Mr. Strider has addressed all of this junk in the past.
Some of these allegations have, indeed, floated around as rumors and gossip for many years. Spark has now gathered them all up into one clear, sparse, concise presentation with apparently-credible, apparently-comprehensive, documentary evidence and put them all in one place at one time. If Mr. Strider has addressed these allegations in the past, then there should be no problem addressing them again because all evidence should be in order. Gathering the refutations with their credible, comprehensive, documentary evidence into one clear, sparse, concise presentation and putting them all in one place at one time would clear all of these allegations, all of the rumors, all of the gossip off the table one and for all. We could sticky this thread and anytime someone heard one of these persistent rumors, we could just point them to this thread and be done with it.
17) Mr. Strider has addressed all of this on another forum.
Maybe. But the allegations and the evidence supporting them are posted here on this forum. If Mr. Strider has already addressed all of this, then it should be very easy for him to post that presentation here too. Again, we could then sticky this thread and anytime someone heard one of these persistent rumors, we could just point them to this thread and be done with it.
18) Mr. Strider doesnt have to answer to anyone
least of all Spark.
No, he doesnt have to. But, he may choose to. The allegations Spark has made against him are very serious and are obviously causing quite a bit of division within the knife community. It would be a great service to the community if he would answer them.
19) Mr. Strider is a very busy man and he hasnt got time for all of this nonsense.
If Mr. Strider has already answered these allegations in the past and recently on another forum, then it should be quite trivial to simply repost those responses here. If he is to busy to so himself, he has at least one employee who posts here and could take care of that for him with his imprimatur. If the response were concise and comprehensive and backed by credible, documentary evidence, then this whole discussion would end quickly and he would not have to continue dealing with the ongoing rumors and gossip and allegations. In the long-run, that would be a time-saver for him. Again, we could simply sticky this thread and the matter would be put to rest.
20) Nobody cares about this stuff anyway.
Then how do you explain over 1600 responses and over 77,000 views? Obviously, some people do care about this.
21) Cant we all just forgive and forget?
The knife community has, over the years, displayed a remarkable capacity to forgive and forget. But, Spark charges that Mr. Strider has not repented from his misrepresentations and that Mr. Strider continues to offend by continuing to misrepresent his military experience and continuing to knowingly allow others to do so on a present and on-going bases.
All of Sparks accusations have one thing in common: They are backed up by apparently-credibly, apparently-conclusive, documentary evidence.
All of the rebuttals have two things in common: 1) none of them addresses the actual allegations or the evidence supporting those allegations, and 2) they all try to shift the topic of discussion away from those allegations and that evidence; they are distraction tactics.
Most of the counters to the rebuttals have one thing in common: They refer back to the apparently-credible, apparently-comprehensive, documentary evidence that Spark has offered to support his allegations.
It all comes down to that evidence. If you want to refute Sparks allegations, then you MUST attack that evidence.
