🚀 go-pugleaf

On Mar 10, 1:27 pm, BruceS <bruce...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 03/09/2013 07:01 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>
> > On Mar 10, 9:49 am, BruceS <bruce...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 03/09/2013 03:59 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>
> >>> On Mar 10, 7:48 am, BruceS <bruce...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> On 03/09/2013 01:33 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>
> >>>>> On Mar 9, 12:32 pm, BruceS <bruce...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> On 03/08/2013 05:52 PM, Graham Cooper wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>> and has been GOING ON THESE PERPETUAL D.O.S. TANGENTS TOPICS
>
> >>>>>>>>> for 3 years EVER SINCE HE WAS THE FIRST SKEPTIC TO EVER LOSE TO A
> >>>>>>>>> MINDREADER!!
>
> >>>>>>>>> BOO YEH!
>
> >>>>>>>> And yet, I *have* put my money where my mouth is, several times, and you
> >>>>>>>> keep refusing even though there's no risk to you.  I keep giving you the
> >>>>>>>> opportunity to prove your abilities, and you (knowing as well as we do
>
> >>>>>>> Yes yes Brucey Boy!
>
> >>>>>>> I call this a DENIAL OF SERVICE  argument.
>
> >>>>>>> You keep bombarding me with 50 Trillion To 1 blind tests for a tasty
> >>>>>>> $5 morsel!
>
> >>>>>> Actually, it's a $1,024 "morsel"---more than the amount you owe Brad.
> >>>>>> All with no financial risk to you.
>
> >>>>>>> -----------------------
>
> >>>>>>> SAME DOS diversion tactics by ALL people who then use it against me.
>
> >>>>>>> Skeptics are particular prone to use this tactic, keep asking a never
> >>>>>>> ending string of Questions, there is no reasonable test, and no prize
> >>>>>>> money ever to be offered!
>
> >>>>>> I just described and offered a very reasonable test.  I'd state it
> >>>>>> again, but anyone who cares can simply look upthread for it.
>
> >>>>>>> Same with the Ray White receptionist, keeps asking and asking for more
> >>>>>>> pay slips and proof of income then has me arrested when I mention I
> >>>>>>> work with CAMGIRLS.com
>
> >>>>>> No, that wasn't about you "working" with camgirls (who have nothing to
> >>>>>> do with you and probably never will), but rather with her assessment
> >>>>>> that you have no income.
>
> >>>>>>> Same with CHANNEL 9 LAWYER when I tried to sue for defamation.  Keeps
> >>>>>>> asking me again and again and again for CAUSE OF ACTION, never
> >>>>>>> responds to a single word I say, just blind DOS tactics until they
> >>>>>>> take you court.
>
> >>>>>> Now you're just babbling.
>
> >>>>>>> Same with CSICOP, asks me for more and more and  more and more details
> >>>>>>> on the DEMO until they ditch you.
>
> >>>>>> I don't even know what you're babbling about now.
>
> >>>>>>> STANDARD TACTICS BRUCES - KEEP ON AND KEEP ON ASKING ME THIS AND
> >>>>>>> OFFERING THAT
>
> >>>>>>> ALL THE TIME - 3 YEARS NOW YOU'VE DISTRACTED AND DETERRED A 2nd
> >>>>>>> MINDREADING TEST.
>
> >>>>>> I'm *offering* another test, just as I've done many times before.
>
> >>>>>>> One has to wonder why you've taken it upon yourself to go to these
> >>>>>>> extremes (OVER 3 YEARS) to never let me mindread another person??
>
> >>>>>> You didn't even *try* to come up with an excuse this time!  OK, let's
> >>>>>> sweeten the pot a little.  Instead of the $1024 prize for getting 20 of
> >>>>>> 20 right, I'll drop the odds a bit.  Instead of 20 questions, we'll just
> >>>>>> have 10.  Get just *half* of them right (that's 5 for
> >>>>>> arithmetically-challenged folks), and I'll pay you $1.  Then I'll
> >>>>>> *quadruple* it for every extra one you get right.  That's right, get 6
> >>>>>> right, and you get $4, 7 right gets you $16, 8 right gets you $64, 9
> >>>>>> right gets you $256, and getting all 10 right gets you $1024!  Are you
> >>>>>> really going to snub your nose at the chance to both prove your
> >>>>>> abilities *and* to make a little better than a grand?  How long does it
> >>>>>> take for you to make that much money on your public assistance?  And no
> >>>>>> risk!
>
> >>>>>> Oh, and of course, I have not done anything to prevent anyone else from
> >>>>>> participating in your tests.  That's just your paranoia speaking.  Even
> >>>>>> though I have seven times as much magic power as you have, it isn't
> >>>>>> enough to force other people to avoid you.  That's all down to you.
>
> >>>>>> I guess it's fair enough to wonder why I do this.  On the one hand, I
> >>>>>> know that you'll never agree to a reasonable test.  Even if you did
> >>>>>> (which would amaze everyone *far* more than your cloud pics do), you'd
> >>>>>> fail that test.  On the other hand, I retain enough open-mindedness to
> >>>>>> be willing to be convinced, even after you've shown yourself a deluded
> >>>>>> loon so many times in the past.
>
> >>>>> I have a Test.
>
> >>>>> a VERY SIMPLE TEST
>
> >>>>> It proves Paranormal reasonably quickly though it takes a while to get
> >>>>> rolling.
>
> >>>>> You Think Of A Word
> >>>>> You Tell me a random Page Number
> >>>>> I Describe Your Word using Bibliomancy   (TELEPATHY)
> >>>>> After 3 goes - I guess all 3 words   (OBJECTIVE)
>
> >>>> And if my word is "toboggan", but you come up with "sushi", you claim
> >>>> that's close enough, because sushi has a connection to tofu, which
> >>>> starts with the same two letters.  No, I don't think so.  Of course, we
> >>>> also know you'll change the rules, so it will be something like the one
> >>>> where you guess the *order* of the words, and not the words themselves.
> >>>>     That way, you have as much chance of getting it right by random chance
> >>>> as if you were guessing a roll of a single six-sided die.
>
> >>>> On the very off chance that you're serious, and believe you can actually
> >>>> guess what the three words are (not just the order), then say what the
> >>>> supposed "bet" is.  What happens if you don't exactly match any of the
> >>>> three, what if you get one, what if you get two, and what if you get all
> >>>> three?  And is this another where you have to have a day between each
> >>>> post, and where you throw a tantrum if anyone on Usenet posts anything
> >>>> else while it's going on?
>
> >>>>> There is a Small Wager because working out 1,000,000:1 contracts has
> >>>>> stalled any observations for 10 years now!
>
> >>>> You haven't even said what the "small wager" is on this latest test.  It
> >>>> doesn't really matter, since we all know you'd back out of it anyway, if
> >>>> anyone took you up on it.  Just like you backed out of paying Brad the
> >>>> $1000 you promised.
>
> >>>>> NO TAKERS!    FINE!   YOU CAN ALL GO TO HELL!
>
> >>>>> I MAKE EDEN ANYWAY!   I USE ALL GODS POWER ALL ON MY OWN FAMILY.   YOU
> >>>>> ALL LIVE LIKE MONKEYS FOR LIFE.
>
> >>>> Your idea of Eden is living all by yourself, in squalor, with the
> >>>> constant threat of police action against you?  OK, if that's what you
> >>>> want, I guess you can keep it.
>
> >>>>> OWNER OF THE $100 MILLION WEBSITE WWW.CAMGIRLS.COM
>
> >>>> No, you aren't.  I don't know why you persist in this patently false
> >>>> claim.  Why don't you claim to be the sole owner of Microsoft instead?
> >>>> As long as you're going to lie, lie big!
>
> >>>> So it all comes down to your refusing to take a test that has a real
> >>>> chance of demonstrating your claimed powers, at no risk to you and with
> >>>> a substantial money prize.  That's just what I predicted would happen.
> >>>> I'll even change the above test from being questions to being words.
> >>>> I'll come up with 10 words instead of 10 questions, and leave the rest
> >>>> of the test as is.  You just have to guess what the order of the ten
> >>>> words is, and if you're right, you make over a thousand dollars---a
> >>>> princely sum to an impoverished ward of the state such as yourself.
>
> >>> YOU'VE DESIGNED 20 TESTS BRUCE
>
> >>> AND THEY ARE ALL SHIT!
>
> >> By which you mean that they would effectively weed out random noise, and
> >> only demonstrate extraordinary ability.  My tests would require someone
> >> to have some sort of magic power (or be incredibly lucky) to win.  Your
> >> tests just require an ordinary amount of luck, and no magic powers.
> >> Guess which ones are more likely to impress people as evidence of you
> >> having magic powers?
>
> >>> LISTEN!  ITS THIS EASY!
>
> >> Yes, your tests are easy to "win" by luck.  We get that.
>
> >>> PARABET 1.0
>
> >>> YOU THINK OF A WORD
> >>> I DESCRIBE IT
> >>> REPEAT 3 TIMES
>
> >>> SHUFFLE 3 WORDS
>
> >>> I PUT THEM IN ORDER
>
> >> Ah, so it's just like I thought; you're making up new rules as you go
> >> along.  Just above, you claimed you'd be able to guess the words.  Now
> >> you're back to just guessing which of 6 possible orders they're in.  You
> >> went from an incredible long shot to a single die throw in one fell
> >> swoop.  This is just a rehash of the test you failed with Brad.  We've
> >> already seen you fail this test spectacularly.  Why would anyone be
> >> interested in watching you fail it again?
>
> >>> HOW THE FUCK SOMEONE COULD BE SO STUPID
>
> >>> TO CALL THAT SUBJECTIVE
>
> >>> AND THEN MAKE HIS OWN TESTS
>
> >>> IS BEYOND STUPIDITY!
>
> >> I realize that your mental illness renders you less capable of
> >> understanding how people could be less than impressed with your claim of
> >> sometimes being able to do a single die throw in the course of a week,
> >> but try to concentrate, and you'll get it eventually.
>
> >>> FUCK OFF BRUCE
>
> >>> YOU'RE THE BIGGEST STUPID IDIOT I'VE EVER FUCKING MET
>
> >> You seem confused, which is not surprising.  You have never met me.  In
> >> fact, I doubt you've ever been on the same continent with me.  Would you
> >> like me to send you a nice, relaxing picture of some clouds?
>
> >> Oh, and for the record, I'm really not very big.  I'm sure you've met
> >> plenty of people bigger than I am.  Then again, the fact that you've
> >> resorted to an all-caps psychotic break indicates that your views are
> >> unlikely to be at all rational.
>
> > Look you moron!
>
> > I'VE OFFERED THE SAME 1 TEST FOR 5 MONTHS!
>
> > PARABET 1.0
>
> > I GUESS WHAT WORD YOU WERE THINKING
>
> No, you don't.  Your test is to guess the *order* of three words, after
> you've been told what the words are.  You don't guess what the words
> are.  You don't guess what anyone is thinking.  You guess the order of
> three words, from six possible orders.  That is as simple as guessing a
> throw of a fair six-sided die.
>
> > 1ST OF ALL SUBJECTIVELY
>
> > THEN I MAKE A 1 IN 3 OPTIONS GUESS.
>
> > ----------------
>
> > You can't even get that far!
>
> You're the one who can't get that far.  Brad agreed to your silly 1:6
> test, and accepted your bet on it.  You bailed out, even though you said
> you couldn't, and now you refuse to pay Brad the $1000 you owe him.
>
> > All your tests are SHIT!
>
> > YOU DESIGN THEM AROUND Things I've said DONT WORK!
>
> I design them around testing something without the huge opportunity to
> "win" by random chance that your tests have.  Other than that, I design
> them to be mechanically the same as the ones you say you can do.
>
> > LOOK!
>
> > ITS THE SAME AS A ZENNER TEST
>
> No, we've tried to get you to do something like a Zener card test, but
> you always refuse, saying you can't do that.  You also like to say you
> can guess random numbers, but then back out of that.
>
> > YOU HAVE 3 SHEETS OF CARDBOARD!
>
> > (I'M SPEAKING METAPHORICALLY HERE)
>
> > ----
>
> > DO *NOT* SPEND 6 MONTHS TELLING ME ABOUT CARDBOARD!
>
> > ----
>
> > YOU WRITE
>
> > "GOD"   on 1 sheet
>
> > YOU WRITE
>
> > "HOUSE"  on sheet 2
>
> > YOU WRITE
>
> > "BIRD"  on sheet 3
>
> > ----
>
> > You KEEP THE WORD TO YOUSELF
>
> > ----
>
> > YOU HOLD UP THE BACK OF THE CARD TO ME
>
> > (I'M SPEAKING METAPHORICALLY AGAIN)
>
> > DO NOT SPEND 6 MONTHS LECTURING ME ABOUT HOLDING UP CARDBOARD!
>
> > -----
>
> > I DESCRIBE EACH CARDBOARD  BLIND!
>
> > -----
>
> > THEN YOU SHUFFLE THE 3 CARDS AND SHOW THEM TO ME
>
> > -----
>
> > I SAY
>
> > THE 1ST CARD WAS BIRD
> > THE 2ND CARD WAS  HOUSE
> > THE 3RD CARD WAS GO
>
> No, you say the first card gave you a "channel" of "ten months of the
> year", the second something like "and the man said he's going to", and
> the third one something like "every other day".  Then, only in
> hindsight, you try to make up excuses for how your "channels" relate to
> the words.  You never manage to match the words, even though it's a
> simple 1:6 chance.
>
> > ITS AS SIMPLE AS FUCKING POSSIBLE
>
> It's simple to "win" by random chance, you mean.
>
> > ITS THE ONLY TEST I EVER MENTION
>
> That's blatantly false.  You've mentioned quite a few tests.
>



What is your problem with the test?


BRUCE:
THE 3 WORDS SHUFFLED WERE
PIG, CAT, VAN

HERC:

DAY1:   WORD WAS CAT
DAY2:   WORD WAS PIG
DAY3:   WORD WAS VAN

It's the same type as 1stMindreadingTest.

I scored roughly 15:1

If you would have DONE IT AGAIN to try and DUPLICATE THE RESULT

that would have made 225:1

Third time running 3000:1 broken, we get a story in the paper!

You did everything possible to avoid duplicating the result, including
20 different
1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000:1
ODDS

tests you designed, where you wouldn't allow a warmup day, and wanted
to run it 30 days running without any feedback.

You consider me leaving a test after winning 1 6:1 trial some kind of
catastrophe to be avoided.

You can SCORE AS YOU GO  =  YOU FUCKING STUPID IDIOT!

You've TALKED 10,000 WORDS on a topic you know NOTHING ABOUT


Herc