At 10:10 AM 12/20/2009, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
On 12/19/2009 06:25 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Further, we know that they can produce something more interesting. I
don't think Hoyt is lying. Do you?
No, Hoyt's not lying. But Hoyt has been lied to and has apparently
been taken in by them (sorry, Hoyt, that's what I see).
That's irrelevant. Hoyt is proof that they can produce something
interesting. I didn't say that it was real.
I would guess that if what he saw under the NDA was the same as what
we have all seen, those who have nosed around the site and associated
web pages, etc., then he would quite likely not feel as he apparently does.
I see no evidence in anything Hoyt has said that they Steorn can do
anything more interesting than what they've done. He says they SAY
they can do better but he hasn't quite seen the good stuff actually working.
Hoyt is as valid a judge of "interesting" as any of us. Don't confuse
"interesting" with "valid."
"Interesting" isn't strictly a product of a thing or condition, it is
a relationship between such and an observer.
From Steorn, it's just lies, lies, lies, and that's all.
Ah, but such interesting lies, and that's quite obvious. Are they
paying all of us to talk about them? They paid the jury, not us.
