Noticed a link in my referrer log from this post which comments on a comment I made in the whole Dyanmic SQL debate, this comment:

Right. Because evaluating arguments based on their validity is too much work, so it's much easier to pick the "winner" by picking the side with the least vested interest. It apparently has nothing to do with the fact that Frans is, well, correct?

Based on my comment taken out of context from this post:

"To be honest I'm always a bit reticent to pay much credence to an argument on an approach to Data Access from someone who has a vested interest."

Sorry, but I did not 'pick a winner' I said in the same post that I took no absolute position in this debate, for the most part I disagreed with Frans's position because I did not agree with many of his arguments, the vested interest comment was based on this by Frans-

"A good O/R mapper helps you with this. Microsoft also believes stored procedures are over: Microsoft's next generation business framework MBF is based on Objectspaces, which generates SQL on the fly. ".

So his position seemed to be boiling down to the belief that you should use an O/R mapper (such as of course, LLBLGen Pro), it was also positing the belief that Microsoft had the belief that this was also true (Objectspaces is ONE approach, Yukon actually increases the utility of Stored procedures by allowing the use of cLR code within them) , in addition I made several comments; and replied to a comment from Frans here on my own site which did challenge the validity or his argument - is it too much work to read ALL the comments?
My initial comment boiled down to the fact that if you have a strong vested interest in any position on any topic, it is likely that your arguments will be slanted to one position over the other, I love pizza so if someone asks what 'the best' food is, I'm going to argue for Pizza. If you also read further into the comments - and Rob Howard's folow up comments - the validity of Frans's argument is challenged alot! What these comments on my post seem to come down to is that this guy agrees with Frans's position, didn't bother checking the 'facts' presented and therefore chose to take task with my position because he didn't agree with it...fine!