.... respond to my posting, please do not use irrelevancies such as your bizarre theories about my personal reactions to what you have written in the past. Please confine yourself to the specific contents of my posting.
You wrote in an earlier post, "If anyone needs to know the context, they can consult the specific bibliographic references which I provided in detail." In response to this I commented, "you have not even bothered to give page numbers". If you found this comment malicious, I do beg your pardon. I am still looking in Lion's excellent book. "Specific"? "In detail"? Page number, please.
There is nothing wrong about my interpretations. I seriously question yours.
You draw astounding conclusions from one comma. From reading the complete "Who's Who" entry, it is clear that the author uses the words "indecisive and ineffectual" with specific regard to Bix's attitude toward formal music studies. The surrounding sentences deal with other aspects (his tone, his influence, his fame) which have no connection to the two adjectives "indecisive and ineffectual".
And you fail to see Hadlock's line of argument. He writes of Bix's attitude towards formal studies: "In school, he customarily ignored his studies". Before this sentence, Hadlock has pointed out:
(1) "Bix apparently developed an early indifference to formal studies";
(2) "He also revealed a tendency toward laziness".
Due to indifference and (also!) a tendency toward laziness, Bix customarily ignored his studies. I don't see how this could be so difficult for you to understand. It is exactly your own attitude toward Schuller's book "The Swing Era" which you probably never once opened during our discussion about the concept of swing. No, I don't see myself as a loser of that argument.