🚀 go-pugleaf

On 29/09/2010 5:55 PM, |-|ercules wrote:
> "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.
>

Ok, then you are offering to answer questions, but you are the sole and 
final arbiter on whether you have done so.
>
>
>
>>
>> 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.

Yes, we've seen that. You screen them right after you get the choice of 
question wrong.

>
>>
>> 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!

And when people cooperate you fail, then you want to change the rules, 
engage in abuse, and so on.

>
> 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.

Or you'll put rat poison in some food? Have a care Herc, you've been 
down this path before.

Sylvia.