🚀 go-pugleaf

>From Osher Doctorow mdoctorow@comcast.net

Doug spamless at nospam.com (the main source of spammers and graffiti
artists on sci.physics) typed:

>actually this is not true at all,  only a minor few are, but check it out
>yourself

He typed this in reply to my statement to the effect that in one U.
Michigan paper most of the main equations are exponential (i.e.,
involve exponentials).  Instead of presenting a list of the main
equations of that paper as a rebuttal, he presented a long list of
papers by other authors with no comment (I doubt whether any of the
papers are relevant, or about as relevant as his history of his last
5-10 postings to usenet, which are restricted to alt.gathering.rainbow
on marijuana, austin.general and austin.forsale which are typical
hangarounds for trolls and graffiti artists, and sci.math whose
relevance for physics during the years that I contributed ranged from
the utopian to the absent-minded mostly.

Let's look at his posting to alt.gathering.rainbow on marijuana, where
he claims to be a doctor who has seen the bad side of marijuana and
goes through detailed recommendations for detecting bad vs good
marijuana so-called.   The rebuttal to him by another reader Whistler
(who posts here below, believe it or not!) boils down to suggesting
that Doug is a dealer who wants people to buy his stuff rather than
other people's "contaminated" stuff.  There's no question that Doug
knows a lot about marijuana, and goes into detail in his rebuttal to
Whistler and in his original posting on marijuana, but he can't go into
detail in this sci.physics contribution where he has to use a list of
articles with no comment or with one wrong comment that I quoted above.

So what is Doug's game, and speaking of that what is Whistler's game
(Whistler, despite criticizing Doug on the marijuana site, suggests
that Doug give me the results on a plate in effect)?   Doug either gets
his kicks by graffiti-izing non-big-name people (a form of Cowardice
which raises serious questions about his Sanity) or in my opinion is a
member of a MoveOn.Org type group which is infuriated about my
occasional anti-Terrorist and pro-Israel comments.  Organizations of
this type are into heavy smears and character assassinations and
variations of "guilt by association" since they have no real positive
agenda of their own to replace whatever power trip they're allegedly
against.

Whistler is harder to evaluate.  He's either a shill of Doug (not
uncommon for MoveOn.Org type organizations and even "unattached"
readers) or he is tailing Doug as a critic.  It will be interested to
follow future graffiti sessions assuming that Whistler doesn't suddenly
do a disappearing act to match his quizzical replies on sci.physics.
However, I'm more interested in physics, so pardon me if I turn on my
garbage disposal.

Osher Doctorow