Good news, everyone! Michael Church is commenting on a HN thread about Google so he can talk about how his ideas about Google+ Games were unjustly ignored!

I, like some other Googlers I know, regularly resist replying to his posts here. But he still hasn't let it go, so I'm going to give it a shot. Feedback from other HNers welcome.

THESE ARE MY OWN WORDS AND PERSONAL OPINIONS AND DO NOT REPRESENT ANYONE ELSE'S.

I'm a random Google engineer and a fan of Euro board games. When michaelochurch wrote his Real Games manifesto here, I thought he made some good points. He's obviously a smart guy, and his writing is long-winded but articulate. Then I watched in horror and fascination as he wrote one jaw-dropping mass email after another. I used to think he was a troll, but I now believe he's completely earnest, which ironically makes him the perfect troll. Since his short time at Google, he has continued to write screeds against Google's internal processes on one Hacker News story after another, where his passion and self-assurance makes him appear credible, when he appears to be suffering from the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

I have hesitated to get involved in these threads, figuring that it's not worth the effort, and knowing that it is asymmetrical, in three respects:

1. It's very difficult to effectively rebut Michael Church's extensive allegations with vague aspersions, but I can't cite specifics from internal discussion lists because they are confidential.

2. Michael Church is indefatigable. We saw what happened when Googler after Googler tried to engage in dialog with him, to reach out to him, to help him. I'm exhausted at the mere thought of trying to describe all the flame wars and all the dirt, much less voluntarily engaging with him now.

3. Personal attacks are distasteful, they're not "Googley," and even if true, they can end up reflecting badly on the attacker.

As the saying goes, "Never mudwrestle with a pig -- you both get dirty, but the pig likes it."

The last time I almost replied to michaelochurch and resisted, it was this post -- http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4715734 -- where he wrote:

> The lesson I learned from that ordeal is not to try to "save" a company from itself because you can't. You'll be seen as right, and possibly even lionized, long after you leave.

This is a quintessential example of his delusion. I say this, not for spite, but for truth: the notion that Michael Church is now "seen as right" inside Google, much less "lionized," is laughable. It literally provoked laughter.

Today, here, michaelochurch wrote:

> I do know a strategy that would have made it succeed because, when I was at Google, I proposed it.

Another quintessential example of his infinite confidence in his own ideas. Simply stunning. Imagine if someone said something like, "I do know a strategy that would have made the Ford Focus succeed because, not long after I was hired at Ford, I proposed it." You would rightly be skeptical, no matter how many thousands of passionate words he wrote on the subject over the following months and years.

I could give some more examples of things written on the web under the name Michael O. Church, but that risks entering the realm of "personal attacks" that I balk at for the reasons described above.

Instead, I'm gonna get back to work now. Thanks for reading. Like many before me, I wish Michael Church the best of luck, I harbor no ill will, and I hope he finds whatever makes him happy.