Discussion:
http://www.notesanddocs.com/
(too old to reply)
Stephen Gray
2018-08-17 11:30:06 UTC
Permalink
http://www.notesanddocs.com/
y***@gmail.com
2018-08-17 11:34:19 UTC
Permalink
Please dont post a URL without saying what it is and why you are posting it.
Madrigal Gurneyhalt
2018-08-17 11:44:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by y***@gmail.com
Please dont post a URL without saying what it is and why you are posting it.
I think you've maybe not grasped how spam works!
Peter Moylan
2018-08-17 11:52:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by y***@gmail.com
Please dont post a URL without saying what it is and why you are posting it.
The warning "never click on a link unless you have good reason to trust
it" has been repeated so often that you'd think everyone would know it
by now. Not so. The promoters of malware continue to use this trick,
because they know that there's a plentiful supply of gullible people in
the world.
--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-08-17 12:51:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by y***@gmail.com
Please dont post a URL without saying what it is and why you are posting it.
The warning "never click on a link unless you have good reason to trust
it" has been repeated so often that you'd think everyone would know it
by now. Not so. The promoters of malware continue to use this trick,
because they know that there's a plentiful supply of gullible people in
the world.
You are right: there are plenty.

During the past couple of weeks Cathryn, Annette, Noelle, Amanda,
Rowena, Sheila, Tanisha, Beatriz, Carolina, Matilda, Patty, Chelsea,
Debbie, Lora, Eliza and Margo have sent me messages saying that they've
installed a malware on an adult video site that I've never heard of, so
that they can spy on me while I'm watching videos and that I should pay
$1200 (the sum varies, but it's always around that) into a bitcoin
account. If I fail to pay they will circulate split-screen videos to
everyone in my address book. I've now paid about $20,000 into various
accounts, and I can't afford much more. What should I do?

They rather undermine their claims by sending the messages to an
address that I stopped using about four years ago, and claiming that my
password was either "()" or one that I had in the distant past.
--
athel
Mack A. Damia
2018-08-17 15:16:46 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 14:51:21 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by y***@gmail.com
Please dont post a URL without saying what it is and why you are posting it.
The warning "never click on a link unless you have good reason to trust
it" has been repeated so often that you'd think everyone would know it
by now. Not so. The promoters of malware continue to use this trick,
because they know that there's a plentiful supply of gullible people in
the world.
You are right: there are plenty.
During the past couple of weeks Cathryn, Annette, Noelle, Amanda,
Rowena, Sheila, Tanisha, Beatriz, Carolina, Matilda, Patty, Chelsea,
Debbie, Lora, Eliza and Margo have sent me messages saying that they've
installed a malware on an adult video site that I've never heard of, so
that they can spy on me while I'm watching videos and that I should pay
$1200 (the sum varies, but it's always around that) into a bitcoin
account. If I fail to pay they will circulate split-screen videos to
everyone in my address book. I've now paid about $20,000 into various
accounts, and I can't afford much more. What should I do?
You really paid?

I got one of those about a month ago, and I contacted Malwarebytes.
They told me to ignore and delete the message. It is a hoax.

But to be on the safe side, block your camera with a piece of tape.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
They rather undermine their claims by sending the messages to an
address that I stopped using about four years ago, and claiming that my
password was either "()" or one that I had in the distant past.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-08-17 16:27:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mack A. Damia
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 14:51:21 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by y***@gmail.com
Please dont post a URL without saying what it is and why you are posting it.
The warning "never click on a link unless you have good reason to trust
it" has been repeated so often that you'd think everyone would know it
by now. Not so. The promoters of malware continue to use this trick,
because they know that there's a plentiful supply of gullible people in
the world.
You are right: there are plenty.
During the past couple of weeks Cathryn, Annette, Noelle, Amanda,
Rowena, Sheila, Tanisha, Beatriz, Carolina, Matilda, Patty, Chelsea,
Debbie, Lora, Eliza and Margo have sent me messages saying that they've
installed a malware on an adult video site that I've never heard of, so
that they can spy on me while I'm watching videos and that I should pay
$1200 (the sum varies, but it's always around that) into a bitcoin
account. If I fail to pay they will circulate split-screen videos to
everyone in my address book. I've now paid about $20,000 into various
accounts, and I can't afford much more. What should I do?
You really paid?
What do you think? I may be as stupid as PTD thinks, but I'm not _that_ stupid!
Post by Mack A. Damia
I got one of those about a month ago, and I contacted Malwarebytes.
They told me to ignore and delete the message. It is a hoax.
I figured that. However, I did wonder if it actually possible to do
what Cathryn et al. claimed to have done. Maybe with a Windows computer?
Post by Mack A. Damia
But to be on the safe side, block your camera with a piece of tape.
I've done that, because although this was certainly a hoax spyware does exist.
Post by Mack A. Damia
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
They rather undermine their claims by sending the messages to an
address that I stopped using about four years ago, and claiming that my
password was either "()" or one that I had in the distant past.
--
athel
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-17 16:38:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Mack A. Damia
You really paid?
What do you think? I may be as stupid as PTD thinks, but I'm not _that_ stupid!
Damia will never go broke underestimating the intelligence of anyone he
addresses.
Tony Cooper
2018-08-17 16:54:42 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 09:38:48 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Mack A. Damia
You really paid?
What do you think? I may be as stupid as PTD thinks, but I'm not _that_ stupid!
Damia will never go broke underestimating the intelligence of anyone he
addresses.
Gotta laugh...this from someone who calls others stupid or a moron
when they point out his errors. And, from someone who thinks
political bad behavior and opposing opinions signifies low
intelligence.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Mack A. Damia
2018-08-17 17:10:41 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 12:54:42 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 09:38:48 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Mack A. Damia
You really paid?
What do you think? I may be as stupid as PTD thinks, but I'm not _that_ stupid!
Damia will never go broke underestimating the intelligence of anyone he
addresses.
Gotta laugh...this from someone who calls others stupid or a moron
when they point out his errors. And, from someone who thinks
political bad behavior and opposing opinions signifies low
intelligence.
Please do not annoy my pet troll, Sparky Daniels. He is encopretic,
and you risk getting a dirty brown screen.
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-17 18:56:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mack A. Damia
Please do not annoy my pet troll, Sparky Daniels. He is encopretic,
Ol' Bunky there is approaching the sociopath in bizarre assertions.

Which is it, Bunky, off the meds or on the sauce?
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-17 18:53:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 09:38:48 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Mack A. Damia
You really paid?
What do you think? I may be as stupid as PTD thinks, but I'm not _that_ stupid!
Damia will never go broke underestimating the intelligence of anyone he
addresses.
Gotta laugh...this from someone who calls others stupid or a moron
when they point out his errors.
Not my fault that you are unable to comprehend simple English describing
even slightly complicated facts and decide that I am in error.

What's your opinion on "IQ" and "g" and racial bias on *Wheel of Fortune*?
Post by Tony Cooper
And, from someone who thinks
political bad behavior and opposing opinions signifies low
intelligence.
You still haven't given any examples of Conway exhibiting intelligence.

Your attitude toward the First Amendment is basically the same as Trump's.
Tony Cooper
2018-08-17 19:48:15 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 11:53:53 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 09:38:48 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Mack A. Damia
You really paid?
What do you think? I may be as stupid as PTD thinks, but I'm not _that_ stupid!
Damia will never go broke underestimating the intelligence of anyone he
addresses.
Gotta laugh...this from someone who calls others stupid or a moron
when they point out his errors.
Not my fault that you are unable to comprehend simple English describing
even slightly complicated facts and decide that I am in error.
What's your opinion on "IQ" and "g" and racial bias on *Wheel of Fortune*?
Never watch the show. Not aware of the "g" spot involved.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
And, from someone who thinks
political bad behavior and opposing opinions signifies low
intelligence.
You still haven't given any examples of Conway exhibiting intelligence.
Oh, yeah, I did. Phi Beta Kappa, magna cum laude university graduate,
Juris Doctor with honors from George Washington University Law School,
appointment as a clerk to a DC Superior Court judge. All cited
before.

She was successful in running a political campaign that elected a man
who had no credentials to serve in any office. The fact that I don't
support that candidate, and think he's made the office the laughing
stock of the world, that doesn't negate the intelligence required to
have pulled that off.

Can you match *any* of those achievements?
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Your attitude toward the First Amendment is basically the same as Trump's.
I don't make the mistake of thinking the First Amendment prohibits the
legal and ethical rights of reporters and the reported on to mutually
agree to what will or will not be reported.

It's not actually the wording of the First Amendment that is
meaningful. As far as the Free Press aspect, all it says is that
"Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom...of the press".

What is meaningful are the later rulings by the Supreme Court that
have interpreted what that entails. The original wording does not
deal with the conditions now in place, but the rulings do.

There was no concept of an NDA when the First Amendment was written.
That a mutually agreed on and valid contract that prohibits the
revealing of something by the press is a concept later developed. The
Trump NDA issue has to do with the validity of the specific contract
itself, not the fact that such a contract can be valid.

You bluster a lot, but you don't cite actual facts. As above where
you bluster that I don't understand the First Amendment, but present
no rebuttal to anything I've said with any actual facts.

You claim that Woodward has "done the same" (as Wolff), but present no
factual support of that claim. Just a hand wave to "read his books".
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-17 21:13:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 11:53:53 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 09:38:48 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Mack A. Damia
You really paid?
What do you think? I may be as stupid as PTD thinks, but I'm not _that_ stupid!
Damia will never go broke underestimating the intelligence of anyone he
addresses.
Gotta laugh...this from someone who calls others stupid or a moron
when they point out his errors.
Not my fault that you are unable to comprehend simple English describing
even slightly complicated facts and decide that I am in error.
What's your opinion on "IQ" and "g" and racial bias on *Wheel of Fortune*?
Never watch the show. Not aware of the "g" spot involved.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
And, from someone who thinks
political bad behavior and opposing opinions signifies low
intelligence.
You still haven't given any examples of Conway exhibiting intelligence.
Oh, yeah, I did. Phi Beta Kappa, magna cum laude university graduate,
Juris Doctor with honors from George Washington University Law School,
appointment as a clerk to a DC Superior Court judge. All cited
before.
How do you get from "connected" to "intelligent"?
Post by Tony Cooper
She was successful in running a political campaign that elected a man
who had no credentials to serve in any office. The fact that I don't
support that candidate, and think he's made the office the laughing
stock of the world, that doesn't negate the intelligence required to
have pulled that off.
And the lack of integrity or morals.
Post by Tony Cooper
Can you match *any* of those achievements?
Elect a buffoon to an office? No.

I wonder which counts as more of an "achievement," Phi Beta Kappa at
Trinity College, Washington, D.C. ("now Trinity Washington University"),
or a Bachelor of Arts "With Distinction in All Subjects" from Cornell
University? I suspect that if Cornell's diplomas were written in Latin,
that would have been registered as "Summa cum laude."

Even her Wikiparticle, which presumably is regularly edited by her
admirers like you, is disgusting. Her first connection seems to have
been none other than Frank Luntz.
Tony Cooper
2018-08-18 00:52:29 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 14:13:08 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 11:53:53 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 09:38:48 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Mack A. Damia
You really paid?
What do you think? I may be as stupid as PTD thinks, but I'm not _that_ stupid!
Damia will never go broke underestimating the intelligence of anyone he
addresses.
Gotta laugh...this from someone who calls others stupid or a moron
when they point out his errors.
Not my fault that you are unable to comprehend simple English describing
even slightly complicated facts and decide that I am in error.
What's your opinion on "IQ" and "g" and racial bias on *Wheel of Fortune*?
Never watch the show. Not aware of the "g" spot involved.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
And, from someone who thinks
political bad behavior and opposing opinions signifies low
intelligence.
You still haven't given any examples of Conway exhibiting intelligence.
Oh, yeah, I did. Phi Beta Kappa, magna cum laude university graduate,
Juris Doctor with honors from George Washington University Law School,
appointment as a clerk to a DC Superior Court judge. All cited
before.
How do you get from "connected" to "intelligent"?
Post by Tony Cooper
She was successful in running a political campaign that elected a man
who had no credentials to serve in any office. The fact that I don't
support that candidate, and think he's made the office the laughing
stock of the world, that doesn't negate the intelligence required to
have pulled that off.
And the lack of integrity or morals.
Post by Tony Cooper
Can you match *any* of those achievements?
Elect a buffoon to an office? No.
I wonder which counts as more of an "achievement," Phi Beta Kappa at
Trinity College, Washington, D.C. ("now Trinity Washington University"),
or a Bachelor of Arts "With Distinction in All Subjects" from Cornell
University? I suspect that if Cornell's diplomas were written in Latin,
that would have been registered as "Summa cum laude."
And I suspect that Cornell's Linguistic program equates "Honors in
Linguistics" to summa cum laude even though all it takes is a GPA of
3.3 overall and a 3.5 in the major and an honors thesis. Dunno where
the bar is for "With Distinction", but probably lower.

Of course you've never really stated that you were in the linguistics
program. You could be a cooking graduate from the Hotel Management
side who took up linguistics as a hobby.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-18 02:30:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 14:13:08 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
You still haven't given any examples of Conway exhibiting intelligence.
Oh, yeah, I did. Phi Beta Kappa, magna cum laude university graduate,
Juris Doctor with honors from George Washington University Law School,
appointment as a clerk to a DC Superior Court judge. All cited
before.
How do you get from "connected" to "intelligent"?
I guess there won't be an answer to that question.
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
She was successful in running a political campaign that elected a man
who had no credentials to serve in any office. The fact that I don't
support that candidate, and think he's made the office the laughing
stock of the world, that doesn't negate the intelligence required to
have pulled that off.
And the lack of integrity or morals.
Post by Tony Cooper
Can you match *any* of those achievements?
Elect a buffoon to an office? No.
I wonder which counts as more of an "achievement," Phi Beta Kappa at
Trinity College, Washington, D.C. ("now Trinity Washington University"),
or a Bachelor of Arts "With Distinction in All Subjects" from Cornell
University? I suspect that if Cornell's diplomas were written in Latin,
that would have been registered as "Summa cum laude."
And I suspect that Cornell's Linguistic program equates "Honors in
Linguistics" to summa cum laude even though all it takes is a GPA of
3.3 overall and a 3.5 in the major and an honors thesis.
There was no such thing in 1972. I don't know what you're looking at.
Post by Tony Cooper
Dunno where
the bar is for "With Distinction", but probably lower.
Of course you've never really stated that you were in the linguistics
program. You could be a cooking graduate from the Hotel Management
side who took up linguistics as a hobby.
I was an undergraduate linguistics major at Cornell University, in the
Linguistics Department (one of many that claim to have been the "first
one in the US"), which in turn was administered by the Division of
Modern Languages and Linguistics, and housed in Morrill Hall, one of the
original three buildings, named for Congressman Dexter Morrill, of upstate
New York, who was responsible for the passage in 1862 of the Land Grant
Act that made possible many public institutions of higher education. (It
wouldn't surprise me if Indiana University is also a land-grant college.)
Cornell is distinctive in having both public (i.e. part of the SUNY system)
and private schools and colleges.
Tony Cooper
2018-08-18 02:49:11 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 19:30:09 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 14:13:08 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
You still haven't given any examples of Conway exhibiting intelligence.
Oh, yeah, I did. Phi Beta Kappa, magna cum laude university graduate,
Juris Doctor with honors from George Washington University Law School,
appointment as a clerk to a DC Superior Court judge. All cited
before.
How do you get from "connected" to "intelligent"?
I guess there won't be an answer to that question.
Dunno how "connected" relates to Phi Beta Kappa, magna cum laude
university graduate, Juris Doctor with honors from George Washington
University Law School, appointment as a clerk to a DC Superior Court
judge.

Appointment as a clerk to a Superior Court Judge is based on
recommendations, but I would hardly say that's being "connected". All
other accomplishments listed have nothing to do with being "connected"
and are based on intelligence and personal application.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-18 12:31:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 19:30:09 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 14:13:08 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
You still haven't given any examples of Conway exhibiting intelligence.
Oh, yeah, I did. Phi Beta Kappa, magna cum laude university graduate,
Juris Doctor with honors from George Washington University Law School,
appointment as a clerk to a DC Superior Court judge. All cited
before.
How do you get from "connected" to "intelligent"?
I guess there won't be an answer to that question.
Dunno how "connected" relates to Phi Beta Kappa, magna cum laude
university graduate, Juris Doctor with honors from George Washington
University Law School, appointment as a clerk to a DC Superior Court
judge.
Appointment as a clerk to a Superior Court Judge is based on
recommendations, but I would hardly say that's being "connected". All
other accomplishments listed have nothing to do with being "connected"
and are based on intelligence and personal application.
You are _very_ naive. Or you have no idea who Frank Luntz is?

Still no evidence of "intelligence." What cases has she argued (and won)?
What contracts has she drawn up that benefited her client? What Law Review
articles has she penned, setting forth interpretations of the law?
David Kleinecke
2018-08-18 17:46:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 19:30:09 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 14:13:08 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
You still haven't given any examples of Conway exhibiting intelligence.
Oh, yeah, I did. Phi Beta Kappa, magna cum laude university graduate,
Juris Doctor with honors from George Washington University Law School,
appointment as a clerk to a DC Superior Court judge. All cited
before.
How do you get from "connected" to "intelligent"?
I guess there won't be an answer to that question.
Dunno how "connected" relates to Phi Beta Kappa, magna cum laude
university graduate, Juris Doctor with honors from George Washington
University Law School, appointment as a clerk to a DC Superior Court
judge.
Appointment as a clerk to a Superior Court Judge is based on
recommendations, but I would hardly say that's being "connected". All
other accomplishments listed have nothing to do with being "connected"
and are based on intelligence and personal application.
You are _very_ naive. Or you have no idea who Frank Luntz is?
Still no evidence of "intelligence." What cases has she argued (and won)?
What contracts has she drawn up that benefited her client? What Law Review
articles has she penned, setting forth interpretations of the law?
It seems to me that Conway has demonstrated her ability by
bringing order into Trump's collapsing campaign. After a few
years academic experience counts for very little - what matters
is what she has done recently. And she did do that.

What she has done the last two years is hard to detect and
what can be seen is not very honorable.
Tony Cooper
2018-08-18 18:28:55 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 10:46:58 -0700 (PDT), David Kleinecke
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 19:30:09 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 14:13:08 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
You still haven't given any examples of Conway exhibiting intelligence.
Oh, yeah, I did. Phi Beta Kappa, magna cum laude university graduate,
Juris Doctor with honors from George Washington University Law School,
appointment as a clerk to a DC Superior Court judge. All cited
before.
How do you get from "connected" to "intelligent"?
I guess there won't be an answer to that question.
Dunno how "connected" relates to Phi Beta Kappa, magna cum laude
university graduate, Juris Doctor with honors from George Washington
University Law School, appointment as a clerk to a DC Superior Court
judge.
Appointment as a clerk to a Superior Court Judge is based on
recommendations, but I would hardly say that's being "connected". All
other accomplishments listed have nothing to do with being "connected"
and are based on intelligence and personal application.
You are _very_ naive. Or you have no idea who Frank Luntz is?
Still no evidence of "intelligence." What cases has she argued (and won)?
What contracts has she drawn up that benefited her client? What Law Review
articles has she penned, setting forth interpretations of the law?
It seems to me that Conway has demonstrated her ability by
bringing order into Trump's collapsing campaign. After a few
years academic experience counts for very little - what matters
is what she has done recently. And she did do that.
What she has done the last two years is hard to detect and
what can be seen is not very honorable.
It is a very narrow view of "intelligence" when it is limited to doing
what the viewer thinks is the right thing to do.

Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-18 19:01:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 10:46:58 -0700 (PDT), David Kleinecke
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 19:30:09 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 14:13:08 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
You still haven't given any examples of Conway exhibiting intelligence.
Oh, yeah, I did. Phi Beta Kappa, magna cum laude university graduate,
Juris Doctor with honors from George Washington University Law School,
appointment as a clerk to a DC Superior Court judge. All cited
before.
How do you get from "connected" to "intelligent"?
I guess there won't be an answer to that question.
Dunno how "connected" relates to Phi Beta Kappa, magna cum laude
university graduate, Juris Doctor with honors from George Washington
University Law School, appointment as a clerk to a DC Superior Court
judge.
Appointment as a clerk to a Superior Court Judge is based on
recommendations, but I would hardly say that's being "connected". All
other accomplishments listed have nothing to do with being "connected"
and are based on intelligence and personal application.
You are _very_ naive. Or you have no idea who Frank Luntz is?
Still no evidence of "intelligence." What cases has she argued (and won)?
What contracts has she drawn up that benefited her client? What Law Review
articles has she penned, setting forth interpretations of the law?
It seems to me that Conway has demonstrated her ability by
bringing order into Trump's collapsing campaign. After a few
years academic experience counts for very little - what matters
is what she has done recently. And she did do that.
What she has done the last two years is hard to detect and
what can be seen is not very honorable.
It is a very narrow view of "intelligence" when it is limited to doing
what the viewer thinks is the right thing to do.
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.

Try this one. Who at the White House is she more intelligent than, and
what's your basis for saying so?
Tony Cooper
2018-08-18 19:59:37 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 10:46:58 -0700 (PDT), David Kleinecke
Post by David Kleinecke
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 19:30:09 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 14:13:08 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
You still haven't given any examples of Conway exhibiting intelligence.
Oh, yeah, I did. Phi Beta Kappa, magna cum laude university graduate,
Juris Doctor with honors from George Washington University Law School,
appointment as a clerk to a DC Superior Court judge. All cited
before.
How do you get from "connected" to "intelligent"?
I guess there won't be an answer to that question.
Dunno how "connected" relates to Phi Beta Kappa, magna cum laude
university graduate, Juris Doctor with honors from George Washington
University Law School, appointment as a clerk to a DC Superior Court
judge.
Appointment as a clerk to a Superior Court Judge is based on
recommendations, but I would hardly say that's being "connected". All
other accomplishments listed have nothing to do with being "connected"
and are based on intelligence and personal application.
You are _very_ naive. Or you have no idea who Frank Luntz is?
Still no evidence of "intelligence." What cases has she argued (and won)?
What contracts has she drawn up that benefited her client? What Law Review
articles has she penned, setting forth interpretations of the law?
It seems to me that Conway has demonstrated her ability by
bringing order into Trump's collapsing campaign. After a few
years academic experience counts for very little - what matters
is what she has done recently. And she did do that.
What she has done the last two years is hard to detect and
what can be seen is not very honorable.
It is a very narrow view of "intelligence" when it is limited to doing
what the viewer thinks is the right thing to do.
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-19 04:38:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
Only because of your sheer ignorance of any topic having to do with that
of this newsgroup. There are original ideas in every section of my book,
but you wouldn't recognize them if you tripped over them.
Tony Cooper
2018-08-19 05:45:01 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:38:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
Only because of your sheer ignorance of any topic having to do with that
of this newsgroup. There are original ideas in every section of my book,
but you wouldn't recognize them if you tripped over them.
A real possibility. If I had a copy, the only use I would have for it
would be as a doorstop, and it could be tripped over.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-19 13:18:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:38:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
Only because of your sheer ignorance of any topic having to do with that
of this newsgroup. There are original ideas in every section of my book,
but you wouldn't recognize them if you tripped over them.
A real possibility. If I had a copy, the only use I would have for it
would be as a doorstop, and it could be tripped over.
You must have very lightweight doors. Not useful in a hurricane.

Imagine being proud of ignorance and of refusal to cure ignorance.

Ignorance can be cured. Stupidity can't.

Nice deflection, though. Still no evidence of "intelligence" on Conway's
part.
Tony Cooper
2018-08-19 13:55:25 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 06:18:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:38:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
Only because of your sheer ignorance of any topic having to do with that
of this newsgroup. There are original ideas in every section of my book,
but you wouldn't recognize them if you tripped over them.
A real possibility. If I had a copy, the only use I would have for it
would be as a doorstop, and it could be tripped over.
You must have very lightweight doors. Not useful in a hurricane.
Imagine being proud of ignorance and of refusal to cure ignorance.
There's no association of refusal to cure ignorance in not being
interested in a book that's subject matter isn't of interest. I have
no interest in the history of writing systems.

Neither of us has purchased any of Laura's books. I remain, as you
do, ignorant of the inside scoop on UK corporate governance and the
audit committee. I don't think Laura would feel that we were refusing
to cure our ignorance of these areas.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-19 14:13:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 06:18:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:38:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
Only because of your sheer ignorance of any topic having to do with that
of this newsgroup. There are original ideas in every section of my book,
but you wouldn't recognize them if you tripped over them.
A real possibility. If I had a copy, the only use I would have for it
would be as a doorstop, and it could be tripped over.
You must have very lightweight doors. Not useful in a hurricane.
Imagine being proud of ignorance and of refusal to cure ignorance.
There's no association of refusal to cure ignorance in not being
interested in a book that's subject matter isn't of interest. I have
no interest in the history of writing systems.
Then there's no reason for you to be uninterested in my book. That's not
what it's about.
Post by Tony Cooper
Neither of us has purchased any of Laura's books. I remain, as you
do, ignorant of the inside scoop on UK corporate governance and the
audit committee. I don't think Laura would feel that we were refusing
to cure our ignorance of these areas.
I doubt whether Laura's books are intended for the gen.pub.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-08-19 14:30:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 06:18:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:38:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
Only because of your sheer ignorance of any topic having to do with that
of this newsgroup. There are original ideas in every section of my book,
but you wouldn't recognize them if you tripped over them.
A real possibility. If I had a copy, the only use I would have for it
would be as a doorstop, and it could be tripped over.
You must have very lightweight doors. Not useful in a hurricane.
Imagine being proud of ignorance and of refusal to cure ignorance.
There's no association of refusal to cure ignorance in not being
interested in a book that's subject matter isn't of interest. I have
no interest in the history of writing systems.
Neither of us has purchased any of Laura's books.
Probably not mine, either, but please do order some immediately, maybe
a dozen at a time for giving to your friends. I need the royalties.
Just think, if everyone who comes to this news group bought a dozen
copies of each book -- they make excellent and very welcome Christmas
presents -- I'd be able to buy a new car, or something.

One of my books was prescribed reading for students at Chalmers
University of Technology. I was in Gothenburg a little after I knew
that, but I never did discover who did the prescribing.
Post by Tony Cooper
I remain, as you
do, ignorant of the inside scoop on UK corporate governance and the
audit committee. I don't think Laura would feel that we were refusing
to cure our ignorance of these areas.
--
athel
Mack A. Damia
2018-08-19 15:28:32 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:55:25 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 06:18:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:38:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
Only because of your sheer ignorance of any topic having to do with that
of this newsgroup. There are original ideas in every section of my book,
but you wouldn't recognize them if you tripped over them.
A real possibility. If I had a copy, the only use I would have for it
would be as a doorstop, and it could be tripped over.
You must have very lightweight doors. Not useful in a hurricane.
Imagine being proud of ignorance and of refusal to cure ignorance.
There's no association of refusal to cure ignorance in not being
interested in a book that's subject matter isn't of interest. I have
no interest in the history of writing systems.
Neither of us has purchased any of Laura's books. I remain, as you
do, ignorant of the inside scoop on UK corporate governance and the
audit committee. I don't think Laura would feel that we were refusing
to cure our ignorance of these areas.
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement. Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book? I don't.
Tony Cooper
2018-08-19 16:32:53 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 08:28:32 -0700, Mack A. Damia
Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:55:25 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 06:18:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:38:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
Only because of your sheer ignorance of any topic having to do with that
of this newsgroup. There are original ideas in every section of my book,
but you wouldn't recognize them if you tripped over them.
A real possibility. If I had a copy, the only use I would have for it
would be as a doorstop, and it could be tripped over.
You must have very lightweight doors. Not useful in a hurricane.
Imagine being proud of ignorance and of refusal to cure ignorance.
There's no association of refusal to cure ignorance in not being
interested in a book that's subject matter isn't of interest. I have
no interest in the history of writing systems.
Neither of us has purchased any of Laura's books. I remain, as you
do, ignorant of the inside scoop on UK corporate governance and the
audit committee. I don't think Laura would feel that we were refusing
to cure our ignorance of these areas.
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement. Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book? I don't.
I'm not in agreement with you. I don't think the character and
personality flaws evidenced by PTD in this group carry over to his
authorship of a book or papers in his subject area. They might carry
over to his relationships with others in his field, though. He's
prone, in this group, to bad-mouth others in his field because his
personal opinion of them is one of disparagement. If he does that at
meetings and events where there are others in the field, his
reputation may suffer. He seems unaware that his opinion is not
always shared by others, and seems to think it should.

He has some strange ideas. He's implied that his book was written for
the "general public". Whoever wrote the blurb that appears on the
book's site at
https://books.google.com/books/about/An_Exploration_of_Writing.html?id=INdCAQAACAAJ&source=kp_cover
also has some strange ideas about what the general public's interests
are. You don't appeal to the general public saying:

"An Exploration of Writing is a book about our alphabets, our
syllabaries, and all the other kinds of writing that people use and
have used for 5000 years. It introduces the general public to a topic
that hardly anyone has heard about, so it clarifies basic linguistic
terms as they occur."

What you do appeal to is the tiny segment of the public who fit in
this part:

"For linguists exploring the growing field of graphonomy-the study of
writing systems-in which the author has long been a pioneer...".

PTD will probably react to these comments with his usual vociferous
rejection of any point I make, but he should - instead - thank me on
the basis that there is no such thing as bad publicity. His book was
mentioned and a link provided.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Mack A. Damia
2018-08-19 16:36:57 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 12:32:53 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 08:28:32 -0700, Mack A. Damia
Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:55:25 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 06:18:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:38:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
Only because of your sheer ignorance of any topic having to do with that
of this newsgroup. There are original ideas in every section of my book,
but you wouldn't recognize them if you tripped over them.
A real possibility. If I had a copy, the only use I would have for it
would be as a doorstop, and it could be tripped over.
You must have very lightweight doors. Not useful in a hurricane.
Imagine being proud of ignorance and of refusal to cure ignorance.
There's no association of refusal to cure ignorance in not being
interested in a book that's subject matter isn't of interest. I have
no interest in the history of writing systems.
Neither of us has purchased any of Laura's books. I remain, as you
do, ignorant of the inside scoop on UK corporate governance and the
audit committee. I don't think Laura would feel that we were refusing
to cure our ignorance of these areas.
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement. Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book? I don't.
I'm not in agreement with you. I don't think the character and
personality flaws evidenced by PTD in this group carry over to his
authorship of a book or papers in his subject area. They might carry
over to his relationships with others in his field, though. He's
prone, in this group, to bad-mouth others in his field because his
personal opinion of them is one of disparagement. If he does that at
meetings and events where there are others in the field, his
reputation may suffer. He seems unaware that his opinion is not
always shared by others, and seems to think it should.
He has some strange ideas. He's implied that his book was written for
the "general public". Whoever wrote the blurb that appears on the
book's site at
https://books.google.com/books/about/An_Exploration_of_Writing.html?id=INdCAQAACAAJ&source=kp_cover
also has some strange ideas about what the general public's interests
"An Exploration of Writing is a book about our alphabets, our
syllabaries, and all the other kinds of writing that people use and
have used for 5000 years. It introduces the general public to a topic
that hardly anyone has heard about, so it clarifies basic linguistic
terms as they occur."
What you do appeal to is the tiny segment of the public who fit in
"For linguists exploring the growing field of graphonomy-the study of
writing systems-in which the author has long been a pioneer...".
PTD will probably react to these comments with his usual vociferous
rejection of any point I make, but he should - instead - thank me on
the basis that there is no such thing as bad publicity. His book was
mentioned and a link provided.
I think you are chained in The Cave, watching Sparky's shadows on the
wall.

His abhorrent and dishonest behavior does not stop when he logs off.

He is giving us a crystal clear picture of who he is.
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-19 16:45:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 12:32:53 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 08:28:32 -0700, Mack A. Damia
Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:55:25 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 06:18:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:38:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
Only because of your sheer ignorance of any topic having to do with that
of this newsgroup. There are original ideas in every section of my book,
but you wouldn't recognize them if you tripped over them.
A real possibility. If I had a copy, the only use I would have for it
would be as a doorstop, and it could be tripped over.
You must have very lightweight doors. Not useful in a hurricane.
Imagine being proud of ignorance and of refusal to cure ignorance.
There's no association of refusal to cure ignorance in not being
interested in a book that's subject matter isn't of interest. I have
no interest in the history of writing systems.
Neither of us has purchased any of Laura's books. I remain, as you
do, ignorant of the inside scoop on UK corporate governance and the
audit committee. I don't think Laura would feel that we were refusing
to cure our ignorance of these areas.
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement. Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book? I don't.
I'm not in agreement with you. I don't think the character and
personality flaws evidenced by PTD in this group carry over to his
authorship of a book or papers in his subject area. They might carry
over to his relationships with others in his field, though. He's
prone, in this group, to bad-mouth others in his field because his
personal opinion of them is one of disparagement. If he does that at
meetings and events where there are others in the field, his
reputation may suffer. He seems unaware that his opinion is not
always shared by others, and seems to think it should.
He has some strange ideas. He's implied that his book was written for
the "general public". Whoever wrote the blurb that appears on the
book's site at
https://books.google.com/books/about/An_Exploration_of_Writing.html?id=INdCAQAACAAJ&source=kp_cover
also has some strange ideas about what the general public's interests
"An Exploration of Writing is a book about our alphabets, our
syllabaries, and all the other kinds of writing that people use and
have used for 5000 years. It introduces the general public to a topic
that hardly anyone has heard about, so it clarifies basic linguistic
terms as they occur."
What you do appeal to is the tiny segment of the public who fit in
"For linguists exploring the growing field of graphonomy-the study of
writing systems-in which the author has long been a pioneer...".
PTD will probably react to these comments with his usual vociferous
rejection of any point I make, but he should - instead - thank me on
the basis that there is no such thing as bad publicity. His book was
mentioned and a link provided.
I think you are chained in The Cave, watching Sparky's shadows on the
wall.
His abhorrent and dishonest behavior does not stop when he logs off.
A statement for which Macadamia Nutcase has not the slightest shred of
evidence.

Just yesterday he provided a precis of his dissertation work that showed
how flawed his methodology was -- the number of subjects used was far
below the number needed for statistical significance.
Post by Mack A. Damia
He is giving us a crystal clear picture of who he is.
It's Nutcase's viewing lenses that are devoid of crystal clarity. He
started inventing canards a few months ago and now apparently believes them.
Mack A. Damia
2018-08-19 17:27:11 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:36:57 -0700, Mack A. Damia
Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 12:32:53 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 08:28:32 -0700, Mack A. Damia
Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:55:25 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 06:18:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:38:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
Only because of your sheer ignorance of any topic having to do with that
of this newsgroup. There are original ideas in every section of my book,
but you wouldn't recognize them if you tripped over them.
A real possibility. If I had a copy, the only use I would have for it
would be as a doorstop, and it could be tripped over.
You must have very lightweight doors. Not useful in a hurricane.
Imagine being proud of ignorance and of refusal to cure ignorance.
There's no association of refusal to cure ignorance in not being
interested in a book that's subject matter isn't of interest. I have
no interest in the history of writing systems.
Neither of us has purchased any of Laura's books. I remain, as you
do, ignorant of the inside scoop on UK corporate governance and the
audit committee. I don't think Laura would feel that we were refusing
to cure our ignorance of these areas.
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement. Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book? I don't.
I'm not in agreement with you. I don't think the character and
personality flaws evidenced by PTD in this group carry over to his
authorship of a book or papers in his subject area. They might carry
over to his relationships with others in his field, though. He's
prone, in this group, to bad-mouth others in his field because his
personal opinion of them is one of disparagement. If he does that at
meetings and events where there are others in the field, his
reputation may suffer. He seems unaware that his opinion is not
always shared by others, and seems to think it should.
He has some strange ideas. He's implied that his book was written for
the "general public". Whoever wrote the blurb that appears on the
book's site at
https://books.google.com/books/about/An_Exploration_of_Writing.html?id=INdCAQAACAAJ&source=kp_cover
also has some strange ideas about what the general public's interests
"An Exploration of Writing is a book about our alphabets, our
syllabaries, and all the other kinds of writing that people use and
have used for 5000 years. It introduces the general public to a topic
that hardly anyone has heard about, so it clarifies basic linguistic
terms as they occur."
What you do appeal to is the tiny segment of the public who fit in
"For linguists exploring the growing field of graphonomy-the study of
writing systems-in which the author has long been a pioneer...".
PTD will probably react to these comments with his usual vociferous
rejection of any point I make, but he should - instead - thank me on
the basis that there is no such thing as bad publicity. His book was
mentioned and a link provided.
I think you are chained in The Cave, watching Sparky's shadows on the
wall.
His abhorrent and dishonest behavior does not stop when he logs off.
He is giving us a crystal clear picture of who he is.
In addition, Sparky Daniels has no idea about statistics and research
designs except what he has picked up from Wikipedia.

He thinks that you cannot take four high school classes totaling about
250 students and do a non-inferential research study on their
attitudes at given times. In fact, my research and conclusions were
based on those students ONLY!

He is an abysmal bozo. He knows nothing. No surprise that he never
got a doctorate. Committees don't favor the dishonest and don't
accept Wikipedia as a valid reference.
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-19 20:20:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:36:57 -0700, Mack A. Damia
Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 12:32:53 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 08:28:32 -0700, Mack A. Damia
Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:55:25 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 06:18:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:38:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
Only because of your sheer ignorance of any topic having to do with that
of this newsgroup. There are original ideas in every section of my book,
but you wouldn't recognize them if you tripped over them.
A real possibility. If I had a copy, the only use I would have for it
would be as a doorstop, and it could be tripped over.
You must have very lightweight doors. Not useful in a hurricane.
Imagine being proud of ignorance and of refusal to cure ignorance.
There's no association of refusal to cure ignorance in not being
interested in a book that's subject matter isn't of interest. I have
no interest in the history of writing systems.
Neither of us has purchased any of Laura's books. I remain, as you
do, ignorant of the inside scoop on UK corporate governance and the
audit committee. I don't think Laura would feel that we were refusing
to cure our ignorance of these areas.
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement. Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book? I don't.
I'm not in agreement with you. I don't think the character and
personality flaws evidenced by PTD in this group carry over to his
authorship of a book or papers in his subject area. They might carry
over to his relationships with others in his field, though. He's
prone, in this group, to bad-mouth others in his field because his
personal opinion of them is one of disparagement. If he does that at
meetings and events where there are others in the field, his
reputation may suffer. He seems unaware that his opinion is not
always shared by others, and seems to think it should.
He has some strange ideas. He's implied that his book was written for
the "general public". Whoever wrote the blurb that appears on the
book's site at
https://books.google.com/books/about/An_Exploration_of_Writing.html?id=INdCAQAACAAJ&source=kp_cover
also has some strange ideas about what the general public's interests
"An Exploration of Writing is a book about our alphabets, our
syllabaries, and all the other kinds of writing that people use and
have used for 5000 years. It introduces the general public to a topic
that hardly anyone has heard about, so it clarifies basic linguistic
terms as they occur."
What you do appeal to is the tiny segment of the public who fit in
"For linguists exploring the growing field of graphonomy-the study of
writing systems-in which the author has long been a pioneer...".
PTD will probably react to these comments with his usual vociferous
rejection of any point I make, but he should - instead - thank me on
the basis that there is no such thing as bad publicity. His book was
mentioned and a link provided.
I think you are chained in The Cave, watching Sparky's shadows on the
wall.
His abhorrent and dishonest behavior does not stop when he logs off.
He is giving us a crystal clear picture of who he is.
In addition, Sparky Daniels has no idea about statistics and research
designs except what he has picked up from Wikipedia.
I have never read anything on Wikipedia, or anywhere else, about statistics.
A psychologist some five years ago tried to explain chi-squares on a
napkin. She was not successful.

What I know about statistics is what I see in numerous reports by
psychologists about experiments on reading acquisition by small children.

I see the size of the cohorts they use. I see the rigorous criteria they
use in selecting them.
Post by Mack A. Damia
He thinks that you cannot take four high school classes totaling about
250 students and do a non-inferential research study on their
attitudes at given times. In fact, my research and conclusions were
based on those students ONLY!
He is an abysmal bozo. He knows nothing. No surprise that he never
got a doctorate. Committees don't favor the dishonest and don't
accept Wikipedia as a valid reference.
Thus exposed, once again, is the lie of a "killfiling."

I don't know where Nutcase posted his summary -- it wasn't in this thread
-- but the unacceptable bit was that he interviewed only a tiny, tiny
fraction of the (only) 250 subjects.
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-19 16:43:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 08:28:32 -0700, Mack A. Damia
Post by Mack A. Damia
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement. Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book? I don't.
I'm not in agreement with you. I don't think the character and
personality flaws evidenced by PTD in this group carry over to his
authorship of a book or papers in his subject area. They might carry
over to his relationships with others in his field, though. He's
prone, in this group, to bad-mouth others in his field because his
personal opinion of them is one of disparagement. If he does that at
meetings and events where there are others in the field, his
reputation may suffer. He seems unaware that his opinion is not
always shared by others, and seems to think it should.
He has some strange ideas. He's implied that his book was written for
the "general public". Whoever wrote the blurb that appears on the
book's site at
https://books.google.com/books/about/An_Exploration_of_Writing.html?id=INdCAQAACAAJ&source=kp_cover
also has some strange ideas about what the general public's interests
"An Exploration of Writing is a book about our alphabets, our
syllabaries, and all the other kinds of writing that people use and
have used for 5000 years. It introduces the general public to a topic
that hardly anyone has heard about, so it clarifies basic linguistic
terms as they occur."
What a strange claim, given the disturbing number of really bad books on
writing, by journalists, that have been published by mainstream publishers
over the last 20 years or so. Some of the earlier ones are discussed here:

http://sino-platonic.org/complete/spp098_book_reviews.pdf

(pp. 47-57; the issues weren't digitized with page-urls)
Post by Tony Cooper
What you do appeal to is the tiny segment of the public who fit in
"For linguists exploring the growing field of graphonomy-the study of
writing systems-in which the author has long been a pioneer...".
PTD will probably react to these comments with his usual vociferous
rejection of any point I make, but he should - instead - thank me on
the basis that there is no such thing as bad publicity. His book was
mentioned and a link provided.
Will you be ordering a copy, or asking one of your many local public
libraries to, so that you can see for yourself?
Tony Cooper
2018-08-19 18:57:42 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:43:42 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 08:28:32 -0700, Mack A. Damia
Post by Mack A. Damia
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement. Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book? I don't.
I'm not in agreement with you. I don't think the character and
personality flaws evidenced by PTD in this group carry over to his
authorship of a book or papers in his subject area. They might carry
over to his relationships with others in his field, though. He's
prone, in this group, to bad-mouth others in his field because his
personal opinion of them is one of disparagement. If he does that at
meetings and events where there are others in the field, his
reputation may suffer. He seems unaware that his opinion is not
always shared by others, and seems to think it should.
He has some strange ideas. He's implied that his book was written for
the "general public". Whoever wrote the blurb that appears on the
book's site at
https://books.google.com/books/about/An_Exploration_of_Writing.html?id=INdCAQAACAAJ&source=kp_cover
also has some strange ideas about what the general public's interests
"An Exploration of Writing is a book about our alphabets, our
syllabaries, and all the other kinds of writing that people use and
have used for 5000 years. It introduces the general public to a topic
that hardly anyone has heard about, so it clarifies basic linguistic
terms as they occur."
What a strange claim, given the disturbing number of really bad books on
writing, by journalists, that have been published by mainstream publishers
http://sino-platonic.org/complete/spp098_book_reviews.pdf
Ahhh, yes, those books really resonated with the general public. You
could hardly pass a bookstore that didn't have a stack of Leonard
Shlain's "The Alphabet versus the Goddess" in the window back in 2000.
It just missed the New York Times Best Seller list for Hardcover
Nonfiction by a mere few hundred thousand copies sold.

I do like the author's response to your review:

"Dear Mr Daniels,

You, sir. have too much time on your hands. I don't think that your
comments about engraving, lithographs, or hand cranked early movies do
anything to discredit my thesis which I notice you have never
addressed.

The question you must ask yourself is why you have such an emotional
investment in proving me wrong. Why is the language you use so
hyperbolic?"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
(pp. 47-57; the issues weren't digitized with page-urls)
Post by Tony Cooper
What you do appeal to is the tiny segment of the public who fit in
"For linguists exploring the growing field of graphonomy-the study of
writing systems-in which the author has long been a pioneer...".
PTD will probably react to these comments with his usual vociferous
rejection of any point I make, but he should - instead - thank me on
the basis that there is no such thing as bad publicity. His book was
mentioned and a link provided.
Will you be ordering a copy, or asking one of your many local public
libraries to, so that you can see for yourself?
Sure. Right after I succumb to the doorstep blandishments of the
latest pair of Jehovah's Witnesses and join their church.

If I would, I would send the copy to Leonard Shlain so he could review
it. I'm sure he would be fair and unbiased.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Mack A. Damia
2018-08-19 19:36:35 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 14:57:42 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:43:42 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 08:28:32 -0700, Mack A. Damia
Post by Mack A. Damia
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement. Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book? I don't.
I'm not in agreement with you. I don't think the character and
personality flaws evidenced by PTD in this group carry over to his
authorship of a book or papers in his subject area. They might carry
over to his relationships with others in his field, though. He's
prone, in this group, to bad-mouth others in his field because his
personal opinion of them is one of disparagement. If he does that at
meetings and events where there are others in the field, his
reputation may suffer. He seems unaware that his opinion is not
always shared by others, and seems to think it should.
He has some strange ideas. He's implied that his book was written for
the "general public". Whoever wrote the blurb that appears on the
book's site at
https://books.google.com/books/about/An_Exploration_of_Writing.html?id=INdCAQAACAAJ&source=kp_cover
also has some strange ideas about what the general public's interests
"An Exploration of Writing is a book about our alphabets, our
syllabaries, and all the other kinds of writing that people use and
have used for 5000 years. It introduces the general public to a topic
that hardly anyone has heard about, so it clarifies basic linguistic
terms as they occur."
What a strange claim, given the disturbing number of really bad books on
writing, by journalists, that have been published by mainstream publishers
http://sino-platonic.org/complete/spp098_book_reviews.pdf
Ahhh, yes, those books really resonated with the general public. You
could hardly pass a bookstore that didn't have a stack of Leonard
Shlain's "The Alphabet versus the Goddess" in the window back in 2000.
It just missed the New York Times Best Seller list for Hardcover
Nonfiction by a mere few hundred thousand copies sold.
"Dear Mr Daniels,
You, sir. have too much time on your hands. I don't think that your
comments about engraving, lithographs, or hand cranked early movies do
anything to discredit my thesis which I notice you have never
addressed.
The question you must ask yourself is why you have such an emotional
investment in proving me wrong. Why is the language you use so
hyperbolic?"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
(pp. 47-57; the issues weren't digitized with page-urls)
Post by Tony Cooper
What you do appeal to is the tiny segment of the public who fit in
"For linguists exploring the growing field of graphonomy-the study of
writing systems-in which the author has long been a pioneer...".
PTD will probably react to these comments with his usual vociferous
rejection of any point I make, but he should - instead - thank me on
the basis that there is no such thing as bad publicity. His book was
mentioned and a link provided.
Will you be ordering a copy, or asking one of your many local public
libraries to, so that you can see for yourself?
Sure. Right after I succumb to the doorstep blandishments of the
latest pair of Jehovah's Witnesses and join their church.
If I would, I would send the copy to Leonard Shlain so he could review
it. I'm sure he would be fair and unbiased.
I understand that book sellers are giving away a free Bubble Boy Fart
Blower with the purchase of his book.
Mack A. Damia
2018-08-19 21:03:44 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 12:36:35 -0700, Mack A. Damia
Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 14:57:42 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:43:42 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 08:28:32 -0700, Mack A. Damia
Post by Mack A. Damia
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement. Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book? I don't.
I'm not in agreement with you. I don't think the character and
personality flaws evidenced by PTD in this group carry over to his
authorship of a book or papers in his subject area. They might carry
over to his relationships with others in his field, though. He's
prone, in this group, to bad-mouth others in his field because his
personal opinion of them is one of disparagement. If he does that at
meetings and events where there are others in the field, his
reputation may suffer. He seems unaware that his opinion is not
always shared by others, and seems to think it should.
He has some strange ideas. He's implied that his book was written for
the "general public". Whoever wrote the blurb that appears on the
book's site at
https://books.google.com/books/about/An_Exploration_of_Writing.html?id=INdCAQAACAAJ&source=kp_cover
also has some strange ideas about what the general public's interests
"An Exploration of Writing is a book about our alphabets, our
syllabaries, and all the other kinds of writing that people use and
have used for 5000 years. It introduces the general public to a topic
that hardly anyone has heard about, so it clarifies basic linguistic
terms as they occur."
What a strange claim, given the disturbing number of really bad books on
writing, by journalists, that have been published by mainstream publishers
http://sino-platonic.org/complete/spp098_book_reviews.pdf
Ahhh, yes, those books really resonated with the general public. You
could hardly pass a bookstore that didn't have a stack of Leonard
Shlain's "The Alphabet versus the Goddess" in the window back in 2000.
It just missed the New York Times Best Seller list for Hardcover
Nonfiction by a mere few hundred thousand copies sold.
"Dear Mr Daniels,
You, sir. have too much time on your hands. I don't think that your
comments about engraving, lithographs, or hand cranked early movies do
anything to discredit my thesis which I notice you have never
addressed.
The question you must ask yourself is why you have such an emotional
investment in proving me wrong. Why is the language you use so
hyperbolic?"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
(pp. 47-57; the issues weren't digitized with page-urls)
Post by Tony Cooper
What you do appeal to is the tiny segment of the public who fit in
"For linguists exploring the growing field of graphonomy-the study of
writing systems-in which the author has long been a pioneer...".
PTD will probably react to these comments with his usual vociferous
rejection of any point I make, but he should - instead - thank me on
the basis that there is no such thing as bad publicity. His book was
mentioned and a link provided.
Will you be ordering a copy, or asking one of your many local public
libraries to, so that you can see for yourself?
Sure. Right after I succumb to the doorstep blandishments of the
latest pair of Jehovah's Witnesses and join their church.
If I would, I would send the copy to Leonard Shlain so he could review
it. I'm sure he would be fair and unbiased.
I understand that book sellers are giving away a free Bubble Boy Fart
Blower with the purchase of his book.
What Sparky doesn't understand because of his obtuse nature is that
you cannot killfile Google Groups. He is killfiled through
Individual.net via Forte Agent. It is not lie.

His abject ignorance about "genuine" research is so astounding, it
deserves comment. I access Google Groups occasionally to see if I
have missed anything. Individual.net is not perfect, and, "Yes", I
have missed your reasoning ability.

Sparky, that was the "qualitative" section of my dissertation. A
certain percentage of students were randomly selected for personal
interviews, and that is the acceptable practice in qualitative
research. Of course, you would not know this. Furthermore, all of the
teachers and facilitators of the various programs were interviewed as
well. Fifteen percent of all students in the experimental group were
personally interviewed.

You are a clever fraud, Daniels. I am convinced of this. You know
nothing about doing genuine research; yet, you wildly criticize my
research of which you know absolutely nothing except from the brief
summary I provided.

On second thought, maybe not so clever.
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-20 00:48:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mack A. Damia
What Sparky doesn't understand because of his obtuse nature is that
you cannot killfile Google Groups.
Several people will be able to tell you how to manage your "killfile."
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-19 20:30:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:43:42 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 08:28:32 -0700, Mack A. Damia
Post by Mack A. Damia
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement. Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book? I don't.
I'm not in agreement with you. I don't think the character and
personality flaws evidenced by PTD in this group carry over to his
authorship of a book or papers in his subject area. They might carry
over to his relationships with others in his field, though. He's
prone, in this group, to bad-mouth others in his field because his
personal opinion of them is one of disparagement. If he does that at
meetings and events where there are others in the field, his
reputation may suffer. He seems unaware that his opinion is not
always shared by others, and seems to think it should.
He has some strange ideas. He's implied that his book was written for
the "general public". Whoever wrote the blurb that appears on the
book's site at
https://books.google.com/books/about/An_Exploration_of_Writing.html?id=INdCAQAACAAJ&source=kp_cover
also has some strange ideas about what the general public's interests
"An Exploration of Writing is a book about our alphabets, our
syllabaries, and all the other kinds of writing that people use and
have used for 5000 years. It introduces the general public to a topic
that hardly anyone has heard about, so it clarifies basic linguistic
terms as they occur."
What a strange claim, given the disturbing number of really bad books on
writing, by journalists, that have been published by mainstream publishers
http://sino-platonic.org/complete/spp098_book_reviews.pdf
Ahhh, yes, those books really resonated with the general public. You
Commercial publishers wouldn't keep putting out dreck like that if it
didn't sell.

Those are only a few titles from before 2000. There have been quite a few
more, since. They would not have been published if the earlier ones did
not sell.

A more recent entry is the attractively printed *AlphabeticalL How Every
Letter Tells a Story* by Michael Rosen (2015), who has some sort of
connection with the BBC. It's the one I mentioned, without identifying,
on p. 4 of my book for the idiotic assertion that the Rosetta Stone bears
an inscription in "hieroglyphics and two varieties of Greek" (p. 9). It's
conceivable that even Tony Cooper knows what's wrong with that assertion.
Post by Tony Cooper
could hardly pass a bookstore that didn't have a stack of Leonard
Shlain's "The Alphabet versus the Goddess" in the window back in 2000.
I think that's a lie.

It was, however, rather notorious in its time -- almost as notorious as
Julian Jaynes's opus.
Post by Tony Cooper
It just missed the New York Times Best Seller list for Hardcover
Nonfiction by a mere few hundred thousand copies sold.
Where did you get your notions about quantities of books sold?
Post by Tony Cooper
"Dear Mr Daniels,
You, sir. have too much time on your hands. I don't think that your
comments about engraving, lithographs, or hand cranked early movies do
anything to discredit my thesis which I notice you have never
addressed.
None is so blind as him who will not see -- a bit ironic for an ophthalmologist, no?
Post by Tony Cooper
The question you must ask yourself is why you have such an emotional
investment in proving me wrong. Why is the language you use so
hyperbolic?"
Because I'm sick and tired of dilettantes who think they're qualified to
write about writing because they can write. (Or about language because they
can talk.)
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
(pp. 47-57; the issues weren't digitized with page-urls)
Post by Tony Cooper
What you do appeal to is the tiny segment of the public who fit in
"For linguists exploring the growing field of graphonomy-the study of
writing systems-in which the author has long been a pioneer...".
PTD will probably react to these comments with his usual vociferous
rejection of any point I make, but he should - instead - thank me on
the basis that there is no such thing as bad publicity. His book was
mentioned and a link provided.
Will you be ordering a copy, or asking one of your many local public
libraries to, so that you can see for yourself?
Sure. Right after I succumb to the doorstep blandishments of the
latest pair of Jehovah's Witnesses and join their church.
Their tracts are even less suitable as doorstops.
Post by Tony Cooper
If I would, I would send the copy to Leonard Shlain so he could review
it. I'm sure he would be fair and unbiased.
Is he still alive? He was rather elderly when his blatherings were published.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-08-20 08:05:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:43:42 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
[ … ]
http://sino-platonic.org/complete/spp098_book_reviews.pdf
Ahhh, yes, those books really resonated with the general public. You
could hardly pass a bookstore that didn't have a stack of Leonard
Shlain's "The Alphabet versus the Goddess" in the window back in 2000.
It just missed the New York Times Best Seller list for Hardcover
Nonfiction by a mere few hundred thousand copies sold.
"Dear Mr Daniels,
You, sir. have too much time on your hands. I don't think that your
comments about engraving, lithographs, or hand cranked early movies do
anything to discredit my thesis which I notice you have never
addressed.
The question you must ask yourself is why you have such an emotional
investment in proving me wrong. Why is the language you use so
hyperbolic?"
I was going to ask how you tracked that one down, but then I noticed
the URL that PTD had kindly provided.

I notice that even 20 years ago he was slipping slang terms into his
academic writing, not just here in recent years. However, I do wonder
if he realizes what "boner" means in the sort of web sites none of us
visit.
--
athel
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-20 11:34:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:43:42 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
http://sino-platonic.org/complete/spp098_book_reviews.pdf
Ahhh, yes, those books really resonated with the general public. You
could hardly pass a bookstore that didn't have a stack of Leonard
Shlain's "The Alphabet versus the Goddess" in the window back in 2000.
It just missed the New York Times Best Seller list for Hardcover
Nonfiction by a mere few hundred thousand copies sold.
"Dear Mr Daniels,
You, sir. have too much time on your hands. I don't think that your
comments about engraving, lithographs, or hand cranked early movies do
anything to discredit my thesis which I notice you have never
addressed.
The question you must ask yourself is why you have such an emotional
investment in proving me wrong. Why is the language you use so
hyperbolic?"
I was going to ask how you tracked that one down, but then I noticed
the URL that PTD had kindly provided.
I notice that even 20 years ago he was slipping slang terms into his
academic writing, not just here in recent years. However, I do wonder
if he realizes what "boner" means in the sort of web sites none of us
visit.
You might want to read more closely if you consider an email to an
incompetent ophthalmologist to be "academic writing."

I would be most surprised to find "boner" meaning 'erection' in a
pornographic site. In that sense, it's a children's word. Meaning
'stupid mistake', it's perfectly ordinary.
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-08-21 08:21:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:43:42 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
http://sino-platonic.org/complete/spp098_book_reviews.pdf
Ahhh, yes, those books really resonated with the general public. You
could hardly pass a bookstore that didn't have a stack of Leonard
Shlain's "The Alphabet versus the Goddess" in the window back in 2000.
It just missed the New York Times Best Seller list for Hardcover
Nonfiction by a mere few hundred thousand copies sold.
"Dear Mr Daniels,
You, sir. have too much time on your hands. I don't think that your
comments about engraving, lithographs, or hand cranked early movies do
anything to discredit my thesis which I notice you have never
addressed.
The question you must ask yourself is why you have such an emotional
investment in proving me wrong. Why is the language you use so
hyperbolic?"
I was going to ask how you tracked that one down, but then I noticed
the URL that PTD had kindly provided.
I notice that even 20 years ago he was slipping slang terms into his
academic writing, not just here in recent years. However, I do wonder
if he realizes what "boner" means in the sort of web sites none of us
visit.
You might want to read more closely if you consider an email to an
incompetent ophthalmologist to be "academic writing."
Not the letter, but the fact that you quoted it in an academic journal.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
I would be most surprised to find "boner" meaning 'erection' in a
pornographic site. In that sense, it's a children's word. Meaning
'stupid mistake', it's perfectly ordinary.
--
athel
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-08-21 08:47:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
[ … ]
I was going to ask how you tracked that one down, but then I noticed
the URL that PTD had kindly provided.
I notice that even 20 years ago he was slipping slang terms into his
academic writing, not just here in recent years. However, I do wonder
if he realizes what "boner" means in the sort of web sites none of us
visit.
You might want to read more closely if you consider an email to an
incompetent ophthalmologist to be "academic writing."
How did you discover that he was an incompetent ophthalmologist? Did
you have your eyes checked by him and found that he made a cock-up of
it?
--
athel
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-21 12:14:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I was going to ask how you tracked that one down, but then I noticed
the URL that PTD had kindly provided.
I notice that even 20 years ago he was slipping slang terms into his
academic writing, not just here in recent years. However, I do wonder
if he realizes what "boner" means in the sort of web sites none of us
visit.
You might want to read more closely if you consider an email to an
incompetent ophthalmologist to be "academic writing."
How did you discover that he was an incompetent ophthalmologist? Did
you have your eyes checked by him and found that he made a cock-up of
it?
He was an opthalmologist who was incompetent at writing about alphabets.

Another incompetent ophthalmologist is a senator from Kentucky, and another
incompetent ophthalmologist is the dictator of Syria. The former apparently
does good work in third-world countries, operating on children but unfortu-
nately keeps returning to the Capitol. I don't know how good the latter was
at his profession.
Tony Cooper
2018-08-21 14:00:01 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 10:47:20 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
[ … ]
I was going to ask how you tracked that one down, but then I noticed
the URL that PTD had kindly provided.
I notice that even 20 years ago he was slipping slang terms into his
academic writing, not just here in recent years. However, I do wonder
if he realizes what "boner" means in the sort of web sites none of us
visit.
You might want to read more closely if you consider an email to an
incompetent ophthalmologist to be "academic writing."
How did you discover that he was an incompetent ophthalmologist? Did
you have your eyes checked by him and found that he made a cock-up of
it?
It follows his method of assessment of intelligence. In his view,
someone is not intelligent if they either disagree with him or he
finds them disagreeable for any reason. Likewise a medical doctor is
incompetent if guilty of the same thing.

I assume that Dr Ben Carson and Dr Rand Paul suffer from a double
whammy.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-21 14:54:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 10:47:20 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I was going to ask how you tracked that one down, but then I noticed
the URL that PTD had kindly provided.
I notice that even 20 years ago he was slipping slang terms into his
academic writing, not just here in recent years. However, I do wonder
if he realizes what "boner" means in the sort of web sites none of us
visit.
You might want to read more closely if you consider an email to an
incompetent ophthalmologist to be "academic writing."
How did you discover that he was an incompetent ophthalmologist? Did
you have your eyes checked by him and found that he made a cock-up of
it?
It follows his method of assessment of intelligence. In his view,
someone is not intelligent if they either disagree with him or he
finds them disagreeable for any reason. Likewise a medical doctor is
incompetent if guilty of the same thing.
Even you are not stupid enough to look up Shlain's book and try to make
sense of it. You would do well to consult the (serious) review by M.
O'Connor that I mentioned in my article.
Post by Tony Cooper
I assume that Dr Ben Carson and Dr Rand Paul suffer from a double
whammy.
Ben Carson appears to be an idiot savant. He seems to have been very good
at pediatric neurosurgery, but it is patently obvious to anyone above the
level of Trump that in any other matter he is utterly incompetent.

Rand Paul, OTOH, is simply a hypocrite. He speaks out against Trump, but has
he ever voted against him? At least his daddy, while crazy, actually did do
what he said he would do.
Tony Cooper
2018-08-21 16:20:47 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 07:54:59 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 10:47:20 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I was going to ask how you tracked that one down, but then I noticed
the URL that PTD had kindly provided.
I notice that even 20 years ago he was slipping slang terms into his
academic writing, not just here in recent years. However, I do wonder
if he realizes what "boner" means in the sort of web sites none of us
visit.
You might want to read more closely if you consider an email to an
incompetent ophthalmologist to be "academic writing."
How did you discover that he was an incompetent ophthalmologist? Did
you have your eyes checked by him and found that he made a cock-up of
it?
It follows his method of assessment of intelligence. In his view,
someone is not intelligent if they either disagree with him or he
finds them disagreeable for any reason. Likewise a medical doctor is
incompetent if guilty of the same thing.
Even you are not stupid enough to look up Shlain's book and try to make
sense of it. You would do well to consult the (serious) review by M.
O'Connor that I mentioned in my article.
A comment that does not address your charge of professional
incompetence as a ophthalmic surgeon.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
I assume that Dr Ben Carson and Dr Rand Paul suffer from a double
whammy.
Ben Carson appears to be an idiot savant. He seems to have been very good
at pediatric neurosurgery, but it is patently obvious to anyone above the
level of Trump that in any other matter he is utterly incompetent.
Incompetent is not the same as unintelligent.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-21 19:07:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 07:54:59 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 10:47:20 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I was going to ask how you tracked that one down, but then I noticed
the URL that PTD had kindly provided.
I notice that even 20 years ago he was slipping slang terms into his
academic writing, not just here in recent years. However, I do wonder
if he realizes what "boner" means in the sort of web sites none of us
visit.
You might want to read more closely if you consider an email to an
incompetent ophthalmologist to be "academic writing."
How did you discover that he was an incompetent ophthalmologist? Did
you have your eyes checked by him and found that he made a cock-up of
it?
It follows his method of assessment of intelligence. In his view,
someone is not intelligent if they either disagree with him or he
finds them disagreeable for any reason. Likewise a medical doctor is
incompetent if guilty of the same thing.
Even you are not stupid enough to look up Shlain's book and try to make
sense of it. You would do well to consult the (serious) review by M.
O'Connor that I mentioned in my article.
A comment that does not address your charge of professional
incompetence as a ophthalmic surgeon.
I made no such charge. Incidentally, "surgeon" is your invention. I never
mentioned that he was "chief of laparoscopic surgery at California Medical
Center in San Francisco."
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
I assume that Dr Ben Carson and Dr Rand Paul suffer from a double
whammy.
Ben Carson appears to be an idiot savant. He seems to have been very good
at pediatric neurosurgery, but it is patently obvious to anyone above the
level of Trump that in any other matter he is utterly incompetent.
Incompetent is not the same as unintelligent.
Splork.
Tony Cooper
2018-08-21 21:01:38 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 12:07:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 07:54:59 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 10:47:20 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I was going to ask how you tracked that one down, but then I noticed
the URL that PTD had kindly provided.
I notice that even 20 years ago he was slipping slang terms into his
academic writing, not just here in recent years. However, I do wonder
if he realizes what "boner" means in the sort of web sites none of us
visit.
You might want to read more closely if you consider an email to an
incompetent ophthalmologist to be "academic writing."
How did you discover that he was an incompetent ophthalmologist? Did
you have your eyes checked by him and found that he made a cock-up of
it?
It follows his method of assessment of intelligence. In his view,
someone is not intelligent if they either disagree with him or he
finds them disagreeable for any reason. Likewise a medical doctor is
incompetent if guilty of the same thing.
Even you are not stupid enough to look up Shlain's book and try to make
sense of it. You would do well to consult the (serious) review by M.
O'Connor that I mentioned in my article.
A comment that does not address your charge of professional
incompetence as a ophthalmic surgeon.
I made no such charge. Incidentally, "surgeon" is your invention.
What? You have said he was an ophthalmologist. Ophthalmologists are
surgeons by training, license, and definition.

You have also said was an "incompetent ophthalmologist".

However, you were wrong about this. He was (he's dead now)
"chairperson of laparoscopic surgery at the California Pacific Medical
Center in San Francisco, and was an associate professor of surgery at
University of California, San Francisco".

Well, wrong in saying he was an ophthalmologist, but maybe you meant
that he would have been incompetent doing eye surgery considering his
training. Laparoscopic approach to surgery of the eye would be quite
frowned on in the medical community and quite possibly have less than
good results. That's a long path to drag out a cataracted lens.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
I never
mentioned that he was "chief of laparoscopic surgery at California Medical
Center in San Francisco."
Instead, you fucked up the medical specialty.

Here, let me help you. Here's what you should have written:

"My apologies. My statements don't reflect what I actually had in
mind. I meant that Dr Shlain wrote a book that I don't consider to be
an acceptable contribution to the field. That, of course, is a
personal opinion and not necessarily the opinion of others.

I also erred in saying that he was an ophthalmologist. His surgical
specialty involves entry points lower than the eye. I am not in a
position to judge his competency as a surgeon or diagnostician.

Please buy my book. I need the sales. Please!"
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-08-22 07:11:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 07:54:59 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 10:47:20 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I was going to ask how you tracked that one down, but then I noticed
the URL that PTD had kindly provided.
I notice that even 20 years ago he was slipping slang terms into his
academic writing, not just here in recent years. However, I do wonder
if he realizes what "boner" means in the sort of web sites none of us
visit.
You might want to read more closely if you consider an email to an
incompetent ophthalmologist to be "academic writing."
How did you discover that he was an incompetent ophthalmologist? Did
you have your eyes checked by him and found that he made a cock-up of
it?
It follows his method of assessment of intelligence. In his view,
someone is not intelligent if they either disagree with him or he
finds them disagreeable for any reason. Likewise a medical doctor is
incompetent if guilty of the same thing.
Even you are not stupid enough to look up Shlain's book and try to make
sense of it. You would do well to consult the (serious) review by M.
O'Connor that I mentioned in my article.
A comment that does not address your charge of professional
incompetence as a ophthalmic surgeon.
I made no such charge.
Weaseling. You called him an incompetent ophthalmologist. Your evidence
for that seems to consists of your opinion about his skill in
linguistics.
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Incidentally, "surgeon" is your invention. I never
mentioned that he was "chief of laparoscopic surgery at California Medical
Center in San Francisco."
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
I assume that Dr Ben Carson and Dr Rand Paul suffer from a double
whammy.
Ben Carson appears to be an idiot savant. He seems to have been very good
at pediatric neurosurgery, but it is patently obvious to anyone above the
level of Trump that in any other matter he is utterly incompetent.
Incompetent is not the same as unintelligent.
Splork.
--
athel
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-22 12:58:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 07:54:59 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 10:47:20 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I was going to ask how you tracked that one down, but then I noticed
the URL that PTD had kindly provided.
I notice that even 20 years ago he was slipping slang terms into his
academic writing, not just here in recent years. However, I do wonder
if he realizes what "boner" means in the sort of web sites none of us
visit.
You might want to read more closely if you consider an email to an
incompetent ophthalmologist to be "academic writing."
How did you discover that he was an incompetent ophthalmologist? Did
you have your eyes checked by him and found that he made a cock-up of
it?
It follows his method of assessment of intelligence. In his view,
someone is not intelligent if they either disagree with him or he
finds them disagreeable for any reason. Likewise a medical doctor is
incompetent if guilty of the same thing.
Even you are not stupid enough to look up Shlain's book and try to make
sense of it. You would do well to consult the (serious) review by M.
O'Connor that I mentioned in my article.
A comment that does not address your charge of professional
incompetence as a ophthalmic surgeon.
I made no such charge.
Weaseling. You called him an incompetent ophthalmologist. Your evidence
for that seems to consists of your opinion about his skill in
linguistics.
Of course. He was incompetent (at what he published a book about), and he
was an ophthalmologist.

Actually, here is how he describes his specialty: "By profession, I am a
surgeon. I head a department at my medical center and I am an associate
professor of surgery at a medical school. As a vascular surgeon operating
on carotid arteries that supply blood to the brain, I have had the opportunity
to observe firsthand the profoundly different functions performed by each
of the brain's hemispheres. My unique perspective led me to propose a
neuroanatomical hypothesis to explain why goddesses and priestesses
disappeared from Western religions."

(Julian Jaynes doesn't appear in his bibliography, though Marija Gimbutas does.)

The impression that he was an ophthalmologist presumably came from the
great emphasis placed on the anatomy and physiology of the eye in the
text. For an antidote one might consult Stanislas Dehaene, *Reading in
the Brain* (2009), though it is marred by its almost sole attention to
alphabetic writing.

Tucked into the book I find a TLS review by Simon Goldhill, dated August
27 1999 [sic format], something more than half a page long, with the
headline "Quite balmy," that you might find interesting. (It seems one
may only consult the TLS archives if one or one's library has a subscription.)
Tony Cooper
2018-08-22 13:59:07 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 05:58:17 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 07:54:59 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 10:47:20 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I was going to ask how you tracked that one down, but then I noticed
the URL that PTD had kindly provided.
I notice that even 20 years ago he was slipping slang terms into his
academic writing, not just here in recent years. However, I do wonder
if he realizes what "boner" means in the sort of web sites none of us
visit.
You might want to read more closely if you consider an email to an
incompetent ophthalmologist to be "academic writing."
How did you discover that he was an incompetent ophthalmologist? Did
you have your eyes checked by him and found that he made a cock-up of
it?
It follows his method of assessment of intelligence. In his view,
someone is not intelligent if they either disagree with him or he
finds them disagreeable for any reason. Likewise a medical doctor is
incompetent if guilty of the same thing.
Even you are not stupid enough to look up Shlain's book and try to make
sense of it. You would do well to consult the (serious) review by M.
O'Connor that I mentioned in my article.
A comment that does not address your charge of professional
incompetence as a ophthalmic surgeon.
I made no such charge.
Weaseling. You called him an incompetent ophthalmologist. Your evidence
for that seems to consists of your opinion about his skill in
linguistics.
Of course. He was incompetent (at what he published a book about), and he
was an ophthalmologist.
What's this? It has already been established that he was *not* an
ophthalmologist.

This a rather unfavorable review of the book, but the author, in his
summary, "highly recommends" reading the book.

http://www.metanexus.net/review-alphabet-versus-goddess/

Interesting that the reviewer's profession is a geologist.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-22 17:10:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 05:58:17 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 07:54:59 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 10:47:20 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I was going to ask how you tracked that one down, but then I noticed
the URL that PTD had kindly provided.
I notice that even 20 years ago he was slipping slang terms into his
academic writing, not just here in recent years. However, I do wonder
if he realizes what "boner" means in the sort of web sites none of us
visit.
You might want to read more closely if you consider an email to an
incompetent ophthalmologist to be "academic writing."
How did you discover that he was an incompetent ophthalmologist? Did
you have your eyes checked by him and found that he made a cock-up of
it?
It follows his method of assessment of intelligence. In his view,
someone is not intelligent if they either disagree with him or he
finds them disagreeable for any reason. Likewise a medical doctor is
incompetent if guilty of the same thing.
Even you are not stupid enough to look up Shlain's book and try to make
sense of it. You would do well to consult the (serious) review by M.
O'Connor that I mentioned in my article.
A comment that does not address your charge of professional
incompetence as a ophthalmic surgeon.
I made no such charge.
Weaseling. You called him an incompetent ophthalmologist. Your evidence
for that seems to consists of your opinion about his skill in
linguistics.
Of course. He was incompetent (at what he published a book about), and he
was an ophthalmologist.
What's this? It has already been established that he was *not* an
ophthalmologist.
Is that where you stopped reading and started deleting?

No wonder people like Richard Yates have a skewed -- a false -- impression
of what I write.
Post by Tony Cooper
This a rather unfavorable review of the book, but the author, in his
summary, "highly recommends" reading the book.
http://www.metanexus.net/review-alphabet-versus-goddess/
Interesting that the reviewer's profession is a geologist.
One might say something about the blind leading the blind.

What he is simply unaware of is the almost complete lack of control of the
facts about alphabets (etc.) displayed in the book. GIGO.

Bad books are often recommended to be read, if only as a case study in badness.
David Kleinecke
2018-08-22 19:38:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 05:58:17 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 07:54:59 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 10:47:20 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
I was going to ask how you tracked that one down, but then I noticed
the URL that PTD had kindly provided.
I notice that even 20 years ago he was slipping slang terms into his
academic writing, not just here in recent years. However, I do wonder
if he realizes what "boner" means in the sort of web sites none of us
visit.
You might want to read more closely if you consider an email to an
incompetent ophthalmologist to be "academic writing."
How did you discover that he was an incompetent ophthalmologist? Did
you have your eyes checked by him and found that he made a cock-up of
it?
It follows his method of assessment of intelligence. In his view,
someone is not intelligent if they either disagree with him or he
finds them disagreeable for any reason. Likewise a medical doctor is
incompetent if guilty of the same thing.
Even you are not stupid enough to look up Shlain's book and try to make
sense of it. You would do well to consult the (serious) review by M.
O'Connor that I mentioned in my article.
A comment that does not address your charge of professional
incompetence as a ophthalmic surgeon.
I made no such charge.
Weaseling. You called him an incompetent ophthalmologist. Your evidence
for that seems to consists of your opinion about his skill in
linguistics.
Of course. He was incompetent (at what he published a book about), and he
was an ophthalmologist.
What's this? It has already been established that he was *not* an
ophthalmologist.
Is that where you stopped reading and started deleting?
No wonder people like Richard Yates have a skewed -- a false -- impression
of what I write.
Post by Tony Cooper
This a rather unfavorable review of the book, but the author, in his
summary, "highly recommends" reading the book.
http://www.metanexus.net/review-alphabet-versus-goddess/
Interesting that the reviewer's profession is a geologist.
One might say something about the blind leading the blind.
What he is simply unaware of is the almost complete lack of control of the
facts about alphabets (etc.) displayed in the book. GIGO.
Bad books are often recommended to be read, if only as a case study in badness.
If you aren't good for anything else you can always be a bad
example,
Peter T. Daniels
2018-08-19 16:35:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mack A. Damia
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement. Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book? I don't.
Let's see whether Nutcase was lying (again) when he claimed (again) he
was "killfiling" me. Let him consult the book and find examples of "lying,
cheating, and falsification."
LFS
2018-08-21 07:56:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:55:25 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 06:18:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:38:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
Only because of your sheer ignorance of any topic having to do with that
of this newsgroup. There are original ideas in every section of my book,
but you wouldn't recognize them if you tripped over them.
A real possibility. If I had a copy, the only use I would have for it
would be as a doorstop, and it could be tripped over.
You must have very lightweight doors. Not useful in a hurricane.
Imagine being proud of ignorance and of refusal to cure ignorance.
There's no association of refusal to cure ignorance in not being
interested in a book that's subject matter isn't of interest. I have
no interest in the history of writing systems.
Neither of us has purchased any of Laura's books. I remain, as you
do, ignorant of the inside scoop on UK corporate governance and the
audit committee. I don't think Laura would feel that we were refusing
to cure our ignorance of these areas.
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement. Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book? I don't.
I do wish you'd stop referring to PTD as Sparky. Sparky was Bob
Cunningham. Bob sometimes irritated people round here but he was a good
egg. He let me borrow his name as a pseudonym for someone in my research
who wanted to remain anonymous.
--
Laura (emulate St George for email)
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-08-21 08:23:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by LFS
Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:55:25 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 06:18:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:38:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
Only because of your sheer ignorance of any topic having to do with that
of this newsgroup. There are original ideas in every section of my book,
but you wouldn't recognize them if you tripped over them.
A real possibility. If I had a copy, the only use I would have for it
would be as a doorstop, and it could be tripped over.
You must have very lightweight doors. Not useful in a hurricane.
Imagine being proud of ignorance and of refusal to cure ignorance.
There's no association of refusal to cure ignorance in not being
interested in a book that's subject matter isn't of interest. I have
no interest in the history of writing systems.
Neither of us has purchased any of Laura's books. I remain, as you
do, ignorant of the inside scoop on UK corporate governance and the
audit committee. I don't think Laura would feel that we were refusing
to cure our ignorance of these areas.
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement. Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book? I don't.
I do wish you'd stop referring to PTD as Sparky. Sparky was Bob
Cunningham. Bob sometimes irritated people round here
He irritated me _a lot_. Maybe not as much as Charles Riggs, that some
people seemed to like, but a lot.
Post by LFS
but he was a good egg. He let me borrow his name as a pseudonym for
someone in my research who wanted to remain anonymous.
--
athel
John Varela
2018-08-21 17:52:31 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 08:23:57 UTC, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by LFS
Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:55:25 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 06:18:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:38:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
Only because of your sheer ignorance of any topic having to do with that
of this newsgroup. There are original ideas in every section of my book,
but you wouldn't recognize them if you tripped over them.
A real possibility. If I had a copy, the only use I would have for it
would be as a doorstop, and it could be tripped over.
You must have very lightweight doors. Not useful in a hurricane.
Imagine being proud of ignorance and of refusal to cure ignorance.
There's no association of refusal to cure ignorance in not being
interested in a book that's subject matter isn't of interest. I have
no interest in the history of writing systems.
Neither of us has purchased any of Laura's books. I remain, as you
do, ignorant of the inside scoop on UK corporate governance and the
audit committee. I don't think Laura would feel that we were refusing
to cure our ignorance of these areas.
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement. Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book? I don't.
I do wish you'd stop referring to PTD as Sparky. Sparky was Bob
Cunningham. Bob sometimes irritated people round here
He irritated me _a lot_. Maybe not as much as Charles Riggs, that some
people seemed to like, but a lot.
I liked both of them.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by LFS
but he was a good egg. He let me borrow his name as a pseudonym for
someone in my research who wanted to remain anonymous.
--
John Varela
Tony Cooper
2018-08-21 19:12:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Varela
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 08:23:57 UTC, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by LFS
Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:55:25 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 06:18:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:38:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
Only because of your sheer ignorance of any topic having to do with that
of this newsgroup. There are original ideas in every section of my book,
but you wouldn't recognize them if you tripped over them.
A real possibility. If I had a copy, the only use I would have for it
would be as a doorstop, and it could be tripped over.
You must have very lightweight doors. Not useful in a hurricane.
Imagine being proud of ignorance and of refusal to cure ignorance.
There's no association of refusal to cure ignorance in not being
interested in a book that's subject matter isn't of interest. I have
no interest in the history of writing systems.
Neither of us has purchased any of Laura's books. I remain, as you
do, ignorant of the inside scoop on UK corporate governance and the
audit committee. I don't think Laura would feel that we were refusing
to cure our ignorance of these areas.
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement. Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book? I don't.
I do wish you'd stop referring to PTD as Sparky. Sparky was Bob
Cunningham. Bob sometimes irritated people round here
He irritated me _a lot_. Maybe not as much as Charles Riggs, that some
people seemed to like, but a lot.
I liked both of them.
I didn't "like" Bob (nor he like me), but I did respect him. I rather
liked Mr Riggs, but I didn't respect him all that much.
Post by John Varela
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by LFS
but he was a good egg. He let me borrow his name as a pseudonym for
someone in my research who wanted to remain anonymous.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
John Varela
2018-08-22 18:21:26 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 19:12:29 UTC, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by John Varela
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 08:23:57 UTC, Athel Cornish-Bowden
<snip>
Post by Tony Cooper
Post by John Varela
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by LFS
Post by Mack A. Damia
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement. Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book? I don't.
I do wish you'd stop referring to PTD as Sparky. Sparky was Bob
Cunningham. Bob sometimes irritated people round here
He irritated me _a lot_. Maybe not as much as Charles Riggs, that some
people seemed to like, but a lot.
I liked both of them.
I didn't "like" Bob (nor he like me), but I did respect him. I rather
liked Mr Riggs, but I didn't respect him all that much.
Sparky was a contributor and I don't recall ever having gotten
crosswise with him.

In the case of Riggs, he was bipolar and allowance had to made for
him when he was in his manic phase. I recall he was once horrible
to Tootsie for no reason but she continued to befriend him.
--
John Varela
Katy Jennison
2018-08-21 11:23:30 UTC
Permalink
[snip tedious derogatory exchange]
Post by LFS
Post by Mack A. Damia
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement.  Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book?  I don't.
I do wish you'd stop referring to PTD as Sparky. Sparky was Bob
Cunningham.
Yes. I was thinking of posting exactly this comment, but you beat me to it.

Bob sometimes irritated people round here but he was a good
Post by LFS
egg. He let me borrow his name as a pseudonym for someone in my research
who wanted to remain anonymous.
--
Katy Jennison
Mack A. Damia
2018-08-21 14:28:16 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 12:23:30 +0100, Katy Jennison
Post by Katy Jennison
[snip tedious derogatory exchange]
Post by LFS
Post by Mack A. Damia
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement.  Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book?  I don't.
I do wish you'd stop referring to PTD as Sparky. Sparky was Bob
Cunningham.
Yes. I was thinking of posting exactly this comment, but you beat me to it.
Aren't you a bit old to be pedaling the same cycle as Laura?

Would you prefer, "Jersey Jizzbag"?

Don't forget to tune into my news conference.
Mack A. Damia
2018-08-21 14:20:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by LFS
Post by Mack A. Damia
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:55:25 -0400, Tony Cooper
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 06:18:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:38:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
Only because of your sheer ignorance of any topic having to do with that
of this newsgroup. There are original ideas in every section of my book,
but you wouldn't recognize them if you tripped over them.
A real possibility. If I had a copy, the only use I would have for it
would be as a doorstop, and it could be tripped over.
You must have very lightweight doors. Not useful in a hurricane.
Imagine being proud of ignorance and of refusal to cure ignorance.
There's no association of refusal to cure ignorance in not being
interested in a book that's subject matter isn't of interest. I have
no interest in the history of writing systems.
Neither of us has purchased any of Laura's books. I remain, as you
do, ignorant of the inside scoop on UK corporate governance and the
audit committee. I don't think Laura would feel that we were refusing
to cure our ignorance of these areas.
Sparky Daniels lies, cheats and falsifies texts in here. You know this
is a true and accurate statement. Do you really believe that this
behavior and conduct in AUE ends when he logs off and deals with other
matters such as authoring a book? I don't.
I do wish you'd stop referring to PTD as Sparky. Sparky was Bob
Cunningham. Bob sometimes irritated people round here but he was a good
egg. He let me borrow his name as a pseudonym for someone in my research
who wanted to remain anonymous.
I will consult my advisors.

There will be a news conference on August 22 at 2 PM Zulu.

2027.
LFS
2018-08-21 08:02:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 06:18:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:38:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
Only because of your sheer ignorance of any topic having to do with that
of this newsgroup. There are original ideas in every section of my book,
but you wouldn't recognize them if you tripped over them.
A real possibility. If I had a copy, the only use I would have for it
would be as a doorstop, and it could be tripped over.
You must have very lightweight doors. Not useful in a hurricane.
Imagine being proud of ignorance and of refusal to cure ignorance.
There's no association of refusal to cure ignorance in not being
interested in a book that's subject matter isn't of interest. I have
no interest in the history of writing systems.
Neither of us has purchased any of Laura's books. I remain, as you
do, ignorant of the inside scoop on UK corporate governance and the
audit committee. I don't think Laura would feel that we were refusing
to cure our ignorance of these areas.
My books were not written for a general audience although the handful of
people who have read them say they're a good read.

But corporate governance has an impact on all our lives because it's
about the behaviour of large corporations and everyone should have an
understanding of the issues involved. I am frequently pursued by
publishers who want me to write a brief introduction to the topic but,
being retired, I am far too busy to do so.
--
Laura (emulate St George for email)
Mack A. Damia
2018-08-21 14:29:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by LFS
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 06:18:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 21:38:16 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 12:01:02 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
Post by Peter T. Daniels
Post by Tony Cooper
Conway isn't doing anything that I consider to be the right thing to
do, but I don't deny her intelligence.
Still not a shred of evidence of it.
No, but I can't produced a single shred of evidence that you are
intelligent either. I do sense a wide spread of disparity, though.
Only because of your sheer ignorance of any topic having to do with that
of this newsgroup. There are original ideas in every section of my book,
but you wouldn't recognize them if you tripped over them.
A real possibility. If I had a copy, the only use I would have for it
would be as a doorstop, and it could be tripped over.
You must have very lightweight doors. Not useful in a hurricane.
Imagine being proud of ignorance and of refusal to cure ignorance.
There's no association of refusal to cure ignorance in not being
interested in a book that's subject matter isn't of interest. I have
no interest in the history of writing systems.
Neither of us has purchased any of Laura's books. I remain, as you
do, ignorant of the inside scoop on UK corporate governance and the
audit committee. I don't think Laura would feel that we were refusing
to cure our ignorance of these areas.
This must be the tedium that Katy was referring to.
Post by LFS
My books were not written for a general audience although the handful of
people who have read them say they're a good read.
But corporate governance has an impact on all our lives because it's
about the behaviour of large corporations and everyone should have an
understanding of the issues involved. I am frequently pursued by
publishers who want me to write a brief introduction to the topic but,
being retired, I am far too busy to do so.
Mack A. Damia
2018-08-17 16:58:49 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 18:27:31 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Mack A. Damia
On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 14:51:21 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by y***@gmail.com
Please dont post a URL without saying what it is and why you are posting it.
The warning "never click on a link unless you have good reason to trust
it" has been repeated so often that you'd think everyone would know it
by now. Not so. The promoters of malware continue to use this trick,
because they know that there's a plentiful supply of gullible people in
the world.
You are right: there are plenty.
During the past couple of weeks Cathryn, Annette, Noelle, Amanda,
Rowena, Sheila, Tanisha, Beatriz, Carolina, Matilda, Patty, Chelsea,
Debbie, Lora, Eliza and Margo have sent me messages saying that they've
installed a malware on an adult video site that I've never heard of, so
that they can spy on me while I'm watching videos and that I should pay
$1200 (the sum varies, but it's always around that) into a bitcoin
account. If I fail to pay they will circulate split-screen videos to
everyone in my address book. I've now paid about $20,000 into various
accounts, and I can't afford much more. What should I do?
You really paid?
What do you think? I may be as stupid as PTD thinks, but I'm not _that_ stupid!
How would I know? I didn't see your wink.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Mack A. Damia
I got one of those about a month ago, and I contacted Malwarebytes.
They told me to ignore and delete the message. It is a hoax.
I figured that. However, I did wonder if it actually possible to do
what Cathryn et al. claimed to have done. Maybe with a Windows computer?
It seems plausible, but Malwarebytes did not address the possibility.
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Mack A. Damia
But to be on the safe side, block your camera with a piece of tape.
I've done that, because although this was certainly a hoax spyware does exist.
Post by Mack A. Damia
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
They rather undermine their claims by sending the messages to an
address that I stopped using about four years ago, and claiming that my
password was either "()" or one that I had in the distant past.
Colonel Edmund J. Burke
2018-08-17 16:58:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by y***@gmail.com
Please dont post a URL without saying what it is and why you are posting it.
The warning "never click on a link unless you have good reason to trust
it" has been repeated so often that you'd think everyone would know it
by now. Not so. The promoters of malware continue to use this trick,
because they know that there's a plentiful supply of gullible people in
the world.
You are right: there are plenty.
During the past couple of weeks Cathryn, Annette, Noelle, Amanda, Rowena, Sheila, Tanisha, Beatriz, Carolina, Matilda, Patty, Chelsea, Debbie, Lora, Eliza and Margo have sent me messages saying that they've installed a malware on an adult video site that I've never heard of, so that they can spy on me while I'm watching videos and that I should pay $1200 (the sum varies, but it's always around that) into a bitcoin account. If I fail to pay they will circulate split-screen videos to everyone in my address book. I've now paid about $20,000 into various accounts, and I can't afford much more. What should I do?
They rather undermine their claims by sending the messages to an address that I stopped using about four years ago, and claiming that my password was either "()" or one that I had in the distant past.
I clicked it an no fucking problem.
Just get a god damned fuckin' virus protection, which is similar to a condom for your computer, you stoopid limey.
Jerry Friedman
2018-08-17 17:41:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by y***@gmail.com
Please dont post a URL without saying what it is and why you are posting it.
The warning "never click on a link unless you have good reason to trust
it" has been repeated so often that you'd think everyone would know it
by now. Not so. The promoters of malware continue to use this trick,
because they know that there's a plentiful supply of gullible people in
the world.
You are right: there are plenty.
During the past couple of weeks Cathryn, Annette, Noelle, Amanda,
Rowena, Sheila, Tanisha, Beatriz, Carolina, Matilda, Patty, Chelsea,
Debbie, Lora, Eliza and Margo have sent me messages saying that they've
installed a malware on an adult video site that I've never heard of, so
that they can spy on me while I'm watching videos and that I should pay
$1200 (the sum varies, but it's always around that) into a bitcoin
account. If I fail to pay they will circulate split-screen videos to
everyone in my address book. I've now paid about $20,000 into various
accounts, and I can't afford much more. What should I do?
...

I can delete those videos from their computers for a quite reasonable
fee, not much more than you've already paid. E-mail me for the address
to send the bitcoin to.
--
Jerry Friedman
Harrison Hill
2018-08-21 18:07:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by y***@gmail.com
Please dont post a URL without saying what it is and why you are posting it.
The warning "never click on a link unless you have good reason to trust
it" has been repeated so often that you'd think everyone would know it
by now. Not so. The promoters of malware continue to use this trick,
because they know that there's a plentiful supply of gullible people in
the world.
You are right: there are plenty.
During the past couple of weeks Cathryn, Annette, Noelle, Amanda,
Rowena, Sheila, Tanisha, Beatriz, Carolina, Matilda, Patty, Chelsea,
Debbie, Lora, Eliza and Margo have sent me messages saying that they've
installed a malware on an adult video site that I've never heard of, so
that they can spy on me while I'm watching videos and that I should pay
$1200 (the sum varies, but it's always around that) into a bitcoin
account. If I fail to pay they will circulate split-screen videos to
everyone in my address book. I've now paid about $20,000 into various
accounts, and I can't afford much more. What should I do?
They rather undermine their claims by sending the messages to an
address that I stopped using about four years ago, and claiming that my
password was either "()" or one that I had in the distant past.
Your billion pounds in bitcoins is probably translatable
into BrE.
Paul Carmichael
2018-08-22 16:21:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by y***@gmail.com
Please dont post a URL without saying what it is and why you are posting it.
The warning "never click on a link unless you have good reason to trust
it" has been repeated so often that you'd think everyone would know it
by now. Not so. The promoters of malware continue to use this trick,
because they know that there's a plentiful supply of gullible people in
the world.
You are right: there are plenty.
During the past couple of weeks Cathryn, Annette, Noelle, Amanda, Rowena, Sheila, Tanisha,
Beatriz, Carolina, Matilda, Patty, Chelsea, Debbie, Lora, Eliza and Margo have sent me
messages saying that they've installed a malware on an adult video site that I've never
heard of, so that they can spy on me while I'm watching videos and that I should pay $1200
(the sum varies, but it's always around that) into a bitcoin account. If I fail to pay
they will circulate split-screen videos to everyone in my address book. I've now paid
about $20,000 into various accounts, and I can't afford much more. What should I do?
Mine are cheaper than yours (730 €):


****************************************************
I hope you actually will not really mind my english sentence structure, considering that i
am from Denmark. I contaminated your gadget with a malware and now have all of your
private information from your operating-system.

It was established on a mature web site then you have picked the video, it, my program
immediately gain access to your os.

Then, your webcamera captured you hand fucking, in addition i documented a vid that
you\'ve looked at.

Immediately after a short while this also pulled out your device contact list. If u need
me to wipe off your all that i possess - transfer me 730 eu in btc its a crypto. It\'s my
btc account address - 15eqSNU6241tx4z7hNe8o8sAUrcaMTpEpp

At this moment you have 28 hrs. to decide Immediately after i will receive the deal i am
going to eliminate this movie and everything completely. In any other case, you should
remember that this evidence is going to be sent to all your friends.
******************************************************

That email address is not used on anything but this PC which has no camera and never
visits dodgy websites - oh, and I've got no friends :-)

OBAUE: Good English, huh?

I've forwarded the message to the abuse address for the domain registrar.
--
Paul.

https://paulc.es/
https://asetrad.org
Athel Cornish-Bowden
2018-08-23 09:47:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul Carmichael
Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden
Post by Peter Moylan
Post by y***@gmail.com
Please dont post a URL without saying what it is and why you are posting it.
The warning "never click on a link unless you have good reason to trust
it" has been repeated so often that you'd think everyone would know it
by now. Not so. The promoters of malware continue to use this trick,
because they know that there's a plentiful supply of gullible people in
the world.
You are right: there are plenty.
During the past couple of weeks Cathryn, Annette, Noelle, Amanda,
Rowena, Sheila, Tanisha, Beatriz, Carolina, Matilda, Patty, Chelsea,
Debbie, Lora, Eliza and Margo have sent me messages saying that they've
installed a malware on an adult video site that I've never heard of, so
that they can spy on me while I'm watching videos and that I should pay
$1200 (the sum varies, but it's always around that) into a bitcoin
account. If I fail to pay they will circulate split-screen videos to
everyone in my address book. I've now paid about $20,000 into various
accounts, and I can't afford much more. What should I do?
Probably they think French victims are richer than Spanish ones.

However, mine don't, I think, come from Denmark and are worded differently.
Post by Paul Carmichael
****************************************************
I hope you actually will not really mind my english sentence structure,
considering that i am from Denmark. I contaminated your gadget with a
malware and now have all of your private information from your
operating-system.
It was established on a mature web site then you have picked the video,
it, my program immediately gain access to your os.
Then, your webcamera captured you hand fucking, in addition i
documented a vid that you\'ve looked at.
Immediately after a short while this also pulled out your device
contact list. If u need me to wipe off your all that i possess -
transfer me 730 eu in btc its a crypto. It\'s my btc account address -
15eqSNU6241tx4z7hNe8o8sAUrcaMTpEpp
At this moment you have 28 hrs. to decide Immediately after i will
receive the deal i am going to eliminate this movie and everything
completely. In any other case, you should remember that this evidence
is going to be sent to all your friends.
******************************************************
That email address is not used on anything but this PC which has no
camera and never visits dodgy websites - oh, and I've got no friends :-)
OBAUE: Good English, huh?
I've forwarded the message to the abuse address for the domain registrar.
--
athel
Colonel Edmund J. Burke
2018-08-17 16:57:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by y***@gmail.com
Please dont post a URL without saying what it is and why you are posting it.
Why not, rubber lips?
Are you the god damned moderator here?
Steve Hayes
2018-08-18 10:53:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephen Gray
http://www.notesanddocs.com/
http://www.khanya.org.za/peeves.htm
--
Steve Hayes http://khanya.wordpress.com
Loading...