🚀 go-pugleaf

"DavidW" <no@email.provided> wrote ...
> |-|ercules wrote:
>> "DavidW" <no@email.provided> wrote
>>>> -|ercules wrote:
>>>> "DavidW" <no@email.provided> wrote...
>>>>>> -|ercules wrote:
>>>>>> "DavidW" <no@email.provided> wrote
>>>>>>>> -|ercules wrote:
>>>>>>>> "DavidW" <no@email.provided> wrote ...
>>>>>>>>>> -|ercules wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> "DavidW" <no@email.provided> wrote
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If your answer is a set NO and you ask me for an answer then
>>>>>>>>>> you broke the TOS.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Okay, let me get this right:
>>>>>>>>> I think of a question, which must be one of the three
>>>>>>>>> questions I offer, and you will answer that question by
>>>>>>>>> somehow using the page and line nos. I enter. Are you saying
>>>>>>>>> that I am barred from asking a question that has only one
>>>>>>>>> possible answer, or a question to which I know the answer?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's a yes / no question, I look at the bible quote which will
>>>>>>>> be God telling me something about your question or an answer.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You haven't cleared up the apparent restrictions with the
>>>>>>> question. Above you imply that it can't be one with a "set"
>>>>>>> answer, which appears to rule out any question I know the answer
>>>>>>> to.
>>>>>>>> I work backwards to tell you exactly what your question was
>>>>>>>> because skeptics are too docile to score a subjective answer.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In any case, you have a 1/2 chance of getting the right answer,
>>>>>>>>> which is not unlikely enough to attribute a correct answer to
>>>>>>>>> mind reading.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Your stats escape me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If all you are doing is giving me the answer (Your site says
>>>>>>> "Before I attempt to answer your question I must read your mind
>>>>>>> what it is!"), then you have a 1/2 chance of getting it right
>>>>>>> (Heads for Yes/Tails for No). There's nothing there about
>>>>>>> determining the question also. Is that a service commitment or
>>>>>>> just a bonus ?
>>>>>>>> I can do it more than once BTW.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Have you seen the new www.MINDREADING.com site?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, that's where your link takes me. Isn't that what we've been
>>>>>>> discussing? P.S. My Usenet server limits cross-posting to three
>>>>>>> other groups. That's why I'm deleting some of the groups you've
>>>>>>> added.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1/ read the terms check box
>>>>>
>>>>> I have read the terms and I agree with them.
>>>>>
>>>>>> 2/ Guessing from 3 options is 3:1
>>>>>
>>>>> Assuming that you are identifying the question. The site only
>>>>> claims to give the correct answer, which is a 1/2 chance.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Please think carefully before bombarding me with objections to a
>>>>>> trivial website form.
>>>>>
>>>>> These are not objections. I am trying to thoroughly understand what
>>>>> you are claiming to be able to do and what restrictions on my
>>>>> questions exist (if any). How about I just give you my questions.
>>>>>
>>>>> At afternoon tea time, do I usually drink a cup of:
>>>>> 1. Coffee?
>>>>> 2. Hot chocolate?
>>>>> 3. Tea?
>>>>>
>>>>> One of those is the question I would like the answer to.
>>>>>
>>>>> Page: 642
>>>>> Line: 71
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> huh?  I've explained over 200 times - a question you want to find
>>>> out the answer to.
>>>> Do any of you comprehend English?
>>>
>>> I only have this thread and one or two earlier ones to go on. I
>>> asked this only days ago in the "ANOTHER 1,000,000 TO 1 <<<MIND
>>> READING>>>" thread: * * *
>>> Can someone give a summary of what Herc is claiming to be able to
>>> do? It seems to be implied with each new thread that readers know
>>> what it's all about. Is Herc some sort of psychic?
>>> * * *
>>
>>
>> I posted
>> V V V V V V V V V V V V V
>> PARANORMAL CLAIM 1
>> PARANORMAL CLAIM 2
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> How could you miss them?
> 
> No idea what that's about.
> 
>>>> I can NOT determine what your question was you were thinking of
>>>> because  you already know the answer.
>>>
>>> I asked about three posts ago what the restrictions on questions are.
>>
>> I SAID READ THE TERMS OF SERVICE.
>>
>> YOU SAID YOU DID.  THEY SAY YOU MUST WANT TO *FIND OUT* THE ANSWER.
> 
> That's right. _From you_. I can only conclude that you are not offering a 
> mindreading service at all. You are merely an all-knowing being from whom any 
> fact of interest may be extracted.
> 
>> WHY DID YOU ASK WHAT DRINK YOU LIKE AND THEN TELL ME YOU FOLLOWED
>> THE TERMS OF SERVICE WHEN YOU DIDN'T?
> 
> I did. I wanted to know the answer, as per the mindreading service I believed at 
> the time you were offering.
> 
>> If there was no money to be bet, would you really be interested in
>> which horse won, you don't even know the the horses names.
> 
> But there _is_ money to be bet, so I very much want to know the answer. Now you 
> appear to be imposing off-the-cuff restrictions on the permitted reasons one 
> wants to know the answer.
> 
> Alright. Give me an example of a reasonable set of questions (say, a set you've 
> received before), and exactly what you mind-read from the subject.


Not interested buddy,  you are being dishonest and there is no way you have
the aptitude to cooperate on a mind read.

There is a balance between simplicity and practicality, if you follow the website
instructions I should be able to determine your question by looking at the
usually subjective answers I can channel.

So far all your questions are intended to test the accuracy of the answer,
since skeptics cannot be persuaded this is not of genuine interest to find
out the answer I cannot help you any further.

You can ask 1 question per day at www.MindReading.com if you want to
test me out!

Herc