At 17:42 07-07-2002 -0400, Erik Reuter wrote: > > 1) You implied that I have mental problems. > >Fantasy. Actually, I just repeated your own words back at you. Your >mental problem implications were exactly the same as those leveled at >Wilbur by you.
That still shows you saying I have mental problems. Since you made that statement, I expect proof. > > 2) I asked you to explain why I must have mental problems, but you > > reply by giving a "psycho-analysis" of someone else (American Patriot) > > for no apparent reason. > >Fact. That is strange, isn't it. I just thought American Patriot was a >more interesting subject than you. Are you jealous? I most certainly am not jealous. You state that I have mental problems but (despite repeated requests) refuse to explain exactly what my mental problems are and why I have them. Trying to duck the question by changing the target of your attack is not acceptable. I demand proof. > > 3) You state that AmPat issued threats in his posts, and that he tried > > to impose his will upon others. > >Fantasy. I did not say "in his posts". If not in his posts, then where and when *did* he issue threats and/or try to impose his will upon others? Post the data. > > 5) You subsequently claim it is based on off-list communications but > refuse > > to provide the relevant data. > >Fantasy. I did not refuse. OK, you did not give an answer because you did not get a clear answer to the question whether or not I found it ethical to post AmPat's off-list e-mails. I subsequently gave you a straight answer, so now I expect you to provide that data. > > 6) You even admit that you do not have those e-mails saved but are working > > from memory, which makes that data worthless. > >Fantasy. No fantasy. You literally said: >I was considering quoting the emails from memory (I don't have them >saved to copy them verbatim) This quote shows you *did* claim not having the e-mails saved but are working from memory. Any amateur scientist (and professional scientist) can tell you that data is worthless if you can not provide that data. >I have an excellent memory for that sort of thing. It is likely >I could quote AmericanPatriot emails to me word for word (although >spelling is another matter). Then again, do so. > > I see no problem with posting AmPat's private e-mails, given that it > > is used for a scientific purpose. f course, since you admit to not > > actually having those e-mails saved, the value of that data is zero. > >Okay, since you're not interested any more I guess you consider this >conversation is over? No. You made several claims but have consistently refused to back them up with proof. You have consistently refused to answer questions. I expect proof for all those claims and answers to all those questions. I will even save you the trouble of finding the e-mail in which I collected those claims and questions (and in the process also prevent you from not answering them by claiming you do not have that e-mail anymore). Here they are again: FACTS: 1) You implied that I have mental problems. 2) I asked you to explain why I must have mental problems, but you reply by giving a "psycho-analysis" of someone else (American Patriot) for no apparent reason. 3) You state that AmPat issued threats in his posts, and that he tried to impose his will upon others. 4) I quote AmPat's posts and show that there is nothing in there that can be considered a threat to listmembers or an attempt to impose his will upon other listmembers. 5) You subsequently claim it is based on off-list communications but refuse to provide the relevant data. 6) You even admit that you do not have those e-mails saved but are working from memory, which makes that data worthless. The unanswered questions: 1) I posted a fake chat-transcript that connects you to porn (including child pornography), and asked you if you would consider yourself a jerk for complaining about it, given the possibility that it might hurt your career. You did not answer the question. 2) I quoted AmPat's posts and asked you to show me in which posts he threatens a listmember and/or tries to impose his will upon others. You did not answer the question. 3) You claim that I fail to see certain things in AmPat's posts, things which you saw very clearly. I asked you to prove me wrong by giving a very detailed analysis of his posts, but so far you have not done so. 4) I asked if you think it is ethical to post an amateur psycho-analysis of someone without that person's permission. You did not answer the question. 5) You claim AmPat is still on this list, and even claim he is subscribed under more than one alias, but when asked under which aliases he is subscribed, you did not answer the question. 6) You mention that AmPat could also read Brin-L on the WWW, but when I asked if you could actually prove he does that, you did not answer. Jeroen _________________________________________________________________________ Wonderful World of Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com Tom's Photo Gallery: http://tom.vanbaardwijk.com
