For reference, @gpuccio is referencing this exchange: Gpuccio: Functional Information Methodology.
Please provide a link.
Well, @Jordan, it has to be hard for him. At UD he has a lot of people who totally agree with him and seem as their hero. For most people, we want to save face after exchanges that doesn’t go well.
For what it is worth, I do not think he was acting in bad faith or being dishonest. It really seems he is buying what he is selling. If that is true (and I think it is), how should he make sense of a group of scholars (including Christians and atheists) that were in uniform agreement about several mistakes he made? That is his challenge.
Look at how he describes the situation he perceives at PS:
Perhaps it’s easy to state falsities, or even frank lies, when you have some dozen fanatics ready to tell that you are right, or at least to stay silent.
Undermining this narrative, these fanatics have no trouble calling me out when they think I am making a bad argument. That is certainly not the situation. So where does he get that idea from? Well, there is the cognitive dissonance, which really needs to be resolved, but also this:
Well, it turns out that he intends to describe us, but he is really describing his situation at UD. This is classic projection. I think we should let it go for now. It normally takes a while for people to work their way out of the thicket when they are in a situation like this. He needs time.
Instead, I recommend we focus on our common ground: Gpuccio on Common Descent. @gpuccio is a respected member of ID who argues for common descent. If we can make his case clearer, with support and explication, I am sure that will important for many people in their camp to understand.