🚀 go-pugleaf

"Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote \...
> On 29/09/2010 3:52 PM, DavidW 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 ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -|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
>>
>> How? Any random person coming across your site more than likely wants to have
>> their mind read. Is that unreasonable? Are you saying that only mind-reading
>> believers are welcome? Okay, let's say a genuine believer shows up. They still
>> want to see you read their mind. What does "THEY SAY YOU MUST WANT TO *FIND OUT*
>> THE ANSWER" have to do with mind-reading?
>>
>>> 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.
>>
>> This is what I'm not getting. I have to be genuinely interested in an answer I
>> don't already know, yet what you claim to be reading is the _question_ I'm
>> asking, which obviously I do know. It's not making sense to me.
>>
>>> 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!
>>
>> After this exchange all day I still have no idea what service you are offering.
>> Is it a mind-read or the answer to a question I'm genuinely interested in?
>>
>>
> 
> If you identify a question to which you want to know the answer, and 
> then shuffle it with two other questions that you also want to know the 
> answers to, then Herc claims to be able to tell you which was the 
> question you initially identified.

No, the other two can "sound like you are interested in them", they are
dummy questions but you should TRY to make it difficult for me.



> 
> He is not offering to answer the question, so you might wonder why it 
> matters whether you want to know the answer, but them's the rules, 
> apparently.

How would you know?  There are further instructions as you require
them on 3 pages of the website.




> 
> However, if he gets the answer wrong, which seems likely 2 times out of 
> 3, he'll claim that some aspect of the questions, the way in which you 
> formulated them, or anything else that you cannot prove one way or the 
> other, caused his error, and that the result is therefore null and void.


I can screen questions.


> 
> In short, in the unlikely case that Herc actually possessed the power, 
> and provided the questioners comply exactly with the largely unstated 
> requirements, it would be possible for Herc to prove that he has the 
> power. In the much more likely case that Herc has no special power at 
> all, he will regard the test as a waste of time, something which at the 
> end of all this, you're likely to agree with.
> 
> Sylvia.

I've been asking for people to just test my claim for 9 years now!

If you're not interested then stop causing detriment to my chances
with other people.

If you stand between me and destiny you will suffer greatly.

Herc