OK. Two idiots agree that there is no Moon. They agree, therefore there is no moon. That is now a fact. Don't bother with looking to see if there is a moon or not.
Anyways, the origin of the reported buy back offer is just as I reported earlier. Just follow the rabbit down the hole from Argon's post.
There was no offer. It was all a bad case of the telephone game.
OK. Two idiots agree that there is no Moon.
***Sounds like it was a moonless night.
They agree, therefore there is no moon.
***OK. There is no moon. Legal fact set.
That is now a fact.
***Got it.
Don't bother with looking to see if there is a moon or not.
***The moon comes back. Does that mean the moon was not there on the night they both agreed there was no moon?
Anyways, the origin
***That's an assertion. The simple fact is that both sides agreed there was an offer on JONP concurrent to the discussion. Just like the two idiots looking up into the sky and saying there's no moon.
of the reported buy back offer is just as I reported earlier.
***Or, the moon came back. In this case, the agreed fact was pulled from the JONP, a lot like the moon disappearing in your analogy.
Just follow the rabbit down the hole from Argon's post.
***Just wait for the moon to reappear.
There was no offer. It was all a bad case of the telephone game.
***There was no moon. You have proven NOTHING. When two opposing sides agree to a fact, it becomes a legal fact even if both sides are essentially mistaken, like an estoppel situation in the law.
You still have not shown that both sides agreed there was some agreement by both sides that there was a buy back/money back offer. You merely assert that there was.
I seem to recall that Dewey was surprised there was such an offer (if there was real offer, not yet demonstrated), because IH might actually have accepted such a deal.
You still have not shown that both sides agreed there was some agreement by both sides that there was a buy back/money back offer. You merely assert that there was.
***Just look upthread. Jed acknowledges it here, and it was acknowledged back in the old thread as well.
I seem to recall that Dewey was surprised there was such an offer (if there was real offer, not yet demonstrated), because IH might actually have accepted such a deal.
***I think your recall is blurred. Dewey kept haranging on the "realness" of the offer, accusing me of buying into everything Rossisez just because it appears on his blog. But ask yerself, how is it that a person like that is s'pozed to buy into it if it never appeared on his blog?
Display MoreYou still have not shown that both sides agreed there was some agreement by both sides that there was a buy back/money back offer. You merely assert that there was.
***Just look upthread. Jed acknowledges it here, and it was acknowledged back in the old thread as well.
I seem to recall that Dewey was surprised there was such an offer (if there was real offer, not yet demonstrated), because IH might actually have accepted such a deal.
***I think your recall is blurred. Dewey kept haranging on the "realness" of the offer, accusing me of buying into everything Rossisez just because it appears on his blog. But ask yerself, how is it that a person like that is s'pozed to buy into it if it never appeared on his blog?
Shifting the burden of proof does not advance your assertion.
Edit: Please show that there was a real offer, not some "telephone game" misunderstanding.
Well made pro-Rossi video, that covers most of the major highlights:
Shifting the burden of proof does not advance your assertion.
Edit: Please show that there was a real offer, not some "telephone game" misunderstanding.
I don't need to. Both sides accepted the FACT at the TIME that there was an offer on the JONP. And Dewey at the time was all hung up -- just like you are right now -- on whether or not it was a "real" offer. But that's simply bullshit because regardless if it was Real or Not, it was admissible as evidence and could have been used to push Rossi around like a rag doll. And even at the time I was saying it was irrelevant whether it was real or not. So try to get past the Huey Dewey LOoie loozerville argumentation and think for yourself about what is a fact and what is not a fact, rather than buying into Humpty Dumpty logic.
Have IH let their E-Cat License lapse by inaction?
Okay Argon - get Rossi to send a letter to Tom Darden offering to buy back his license and the 1MW unit. $11.5M plus reasonable contract separation terms, mutual indemnifications and confidentiality agreements. He'll need to move quickly as the bombers are fueled and ready.
Dewey, no I will not since I told I'm not in any relations to him, Mr Rossi sees your message written here or most probably not since he has repeated in JONP that he is not following forums.
Sad to see testosterone, emotions and business arrogance to kick in again. Only history will tell was it a wise move or smart move. At least I can say I died trying, luckily only emotionally towards humanity today.
What ever happens from now on between IH and Mr Rossi is most probably well deserved, and I will focus following more on real events than talks and speculations.
All the best whatever the parties decide to do next
So who suggested a quick settlement offer, and where was it published?
The facts suggest not Rossi, and not on JoNP.
The facts suggest not Rossi, and not on JoNP.
***Both sides of the debate upthread and both sides of the debate AT The TIME agreed that the offer appeared on JONP. Learn what a fact is, rather than a Humpty Dumpty desire to redefine a word.
Both sides of the debate upthread and both sides of the debate AT The TIME agreed that the offer appeared on JONP.
Incorrect. A message appeared on JONP. We do not agree it was an offer. We say it was NOT an offer because it was not sent in writing with a signature to I.H., or stated by a lawyer in meeting and then written down. An offhand comment on a blog is not a business offer. You disagree. You think it is, and you imagine that a court would hold Rossi responsible for it. I think you are wrong and you have no idea what you are talking about. I also think you should stop misrepresenting what I and other said and meant. You know darn we do not consider that an "offer."
because IH might actually have accepted such a deal.
Now you're getting it. That was how I saw things at the time, and no one around here has been able to tell me why they didn't accept the offer. There's been plenty of denial but no explanation. Lots of focus on whether the offer was "genuine" but no explanation why IH did not accept the offer.
I think I figured out why they never accepted the offer. It's because they were never told there was an offer. With all his huffing and puffing right here on this forum, Dewey never approached IH to ask them if they would accept such an offer or if they could use it to push Rossi around. Yet another example of how Dewey was a FAILURE.
IH ran up legal bills of $5M. You can't expect their lawyers to approach their own clients a year earlier (or whenever the offer appeared) and say, "gee, you don't need us, you can just accept this here payment and be done with us." No doubt they convinced themselves of all that razmatazz horse hockey that Jed was thinking upthread about how all contracts have to be signed, sealed, delivered, notarized and suitably sanctified. That, and the displayed attempt to get Rossi's IP.
Incorrect. A message appeared on JONP. We do not agree it was an offer. We say it was NOT an offer because it was not sent in writing with a signature to I.H., or stated by a lawyer in meeting and then written down. An offhand comment on a blog is not a business offer. You disagree. You think it is, and you imagine that a court would hold Rossi responsible for it. I think you are wrong and you have no idea what you are talking about. I also think you should stop misrepresenting what I and other said and meant. You know darn we do not consider that an "offer."
At the time, you acknowledged it as an unaccepted offer. Now you're trying to apply legalese definitions to the idea of a contract (an ACCEPTED OFFER) which you simply have no idea how that stuff works. First you say that unwritten contracts are unenforceable and then you browbeat about how that McDonald's unwritten contract (tort)
was enforced, with all them fancy-dancy details that you consider so important.
The "message" was simply an offer. Just because you've now surrounded yourself with Humpty Dumpty Luddites, doesn't change the meaning of the term.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/offer
offer[aw-fer, of-er]
SYNONYMS|EXAMPLES|WORD ORIGIN
SEE MORE SYNONYMS FOR offer ON THESAURUS.COM
verb (used with object)
to present for acceptance or rejection; proffer:
He offered me a cigarette.
to propose or put forward for consideration:
to offer a suggestion.
SEE MORE
verb (used without object)
to present itself; occur:
Whenever an opportunity offered, he slipped off to town.
SEE MORE
noun
an act or instance of offering:
an offer of help.
the condition of being offered:
an offer for sale.
IH didn’t accept the offer, because if there is any offer here, it was suggested by Dewey after discussion with Argon. I don’t know if that is an official offer or not. However Rossi did not make a settlement offer (not talking about the one immediately before the trial started), and no offer appeared on JoNP. Rossi refused what might have been an offer from IH, made here of LF, because, as he explained to Ruby Slippers, he had already unilaterally pulled the licence from IH and therefore IH was in no position to make such a deal (according to Rossi).
I am confussed by these claims of offers posted in some obsure blog.
Who is this "Ruby Shale" that claims an offer was made? Is that a real person, a person claiming to be Ruby, a sock puppet, a post in a Rossi controlled blog posted by a Rossi employee, who knows.
Does this Ruby person (if real and not a misrepresentation of someone) have the right to make an offer on behalf of IH?
What were the terms of this alleged offer?
I am with Jed on this. Some statement by someone on a blog controlled by Rossi is not proof of an offer.
True the statement that someone claimed there was an offer on a blog is evidence that the blog said something but there it is not proof that an offer was actually made by IH or one of its approved delegates.
If is was otherwise, we would be seeing all kinds of "offers" in obscure blogs by posters with unproven identity ,
.... like "General Electric has offered me $10M for using their light bulbs". ....then, If I don't get my money I will sue them.
Para - I see that you are also living rent free in Tork's head. All you have to do is rattle the cage once then sit back and watch what happens.
Shane - how long has that video been out and any idea who Mike Phalen is? The video is interestingly produced and, not surprisingly, is packed full of lies and misrepresentations. I particularly like the one where Penon could not have submitted a fraudulent report to the court because that would be against the law. Or how about the claim that the R'ster had the settlement option of the IP or money from the "offer" that IH made after "48 minutes of trial". What a total crock! Another name for the list if and when the R'ster takes his first US deposit.
If you click on the Youtube logo on Mike Phalen's video (above) you can see the publication date and exactly how many views it has had since.
IH didn’t accept the offer,
***Thanks for admitting there WAS an offer. We all KNOW that IH didn't accept the offer.
because if there is any offer here,
***Your tenses are all screwed up. Might as well check upthread for your own correction.
it was suggested by Dewey after discussion with Argon.
***Horse manure. Dewey basically threatened legal action against this forum and those within it , just for bringing up the offer, so Eric Walker had to move the items to some other thread. Fantastic moderating /s.
I don’t know if that is an official offer or not.
***Here we go again. It doesn't matter if it's an official offer because a good lawyer can make hay out of it either way.
However Rossi did not make a settlement offer
***Of course he did. It was acknowledged right on the thread. You're just hung up on whether it was a 'genuine' offer.
(not talking about the one immediately before the trial started), and no offer appeared on JoNP.
***It was acknowledged on the Rossi v. Darden thread AT The Time that the offer appeared on JONP. Too bad for you that you weren't savvy enough to realize its significance. Of course, the resident legal scholar around here was telling everyone it was irrelevant, but look at y'all now, realizing that IH would have accepted such a generous offer or could have used it to make mincemeat out of Rossi.
Rossi refused what might have been an offer from IH, made here of LF,
***This is news. Please point out where this happened, right here on LF.
because, as he explained to Ruby Slippers, he had already unilaterally pulled the licence from IH and therefore IH was in no position to make such a deal (according to Rossi).
***So... let me get this straight. When I point out that there was language on Rossi's blog about an offer, y'all are all over my ass claiming that I believe every word on his blog, and yet, look at you right now believing stuff from Rossi's blog right here right now using this "according to Rossi" hedging. It's got to be obvious even to you that Rossi had to get RID of that language on his blog so that it could NOT be used against him in the trial, so he invented an obvious sock puppet account resembling Ruby Carat and ran yet another Rossi shenanigan. Geez, you guys are even more pedestrian than I realized.
I am confussed by these claims of offers posted in some obsure blog.
***The obscure blog was Rossi's JoNP.
Who is this "Ruby Shale" that claims an offer was made?
***She's probably a sock puppet account created by Rossi after he removed the actual language of the offer for compromise from his website.
Is that a real person, a person claiming to be Ruby, a sock puppet, a post in a Rossi controlled blog posted by a Rossi employee, who knows.
***By saying "who knows", you give in to Rossi's shenanigan.
Does this Ruby person (if real and not a misrepresentation of someone) have the right to make an offer on behalf of IH?
***No.
What were the terms of this alleged offer?
***It appears it was for the whole nut of $11.5M.
I am with Jed on this.
***Good, because he accepted IN SITU on the Rossi v. Darden thread AT the TIME that there WAS an offer on JONP.
Some statement by someone on a blog controlled by Rossi is not proof of an offer.
***Two people from opposing sides agreeing on a fact are proof of the fact. And Jed , myself, Bob, and maybe 1 or 2 others on the thread all acknowledged that an offer had been made on the JONP, so that's proof of an offer. The mystery at the time was why IH didn't jump all over the offer.
True the statement that someone claimed there was an offer on a blog is evidence that the blog said something
***Glad to have you on board.
but there it is not proof that an offer was actually made by IH
***That's because the offer was made by Rossi.
or one of its approved delegates.
***It was on Rossi's blog so it would have been one of his approved delegates.
If is was otherwise, we would be seeing all kinds of "offers" in obscure blogs by posters with unproven identity ,
***If you make an offer on your own blog, it aint a case of unproven identity.
.... like "General Electric has offered me $10M for using their light bulbs"
***If General Electric makes a weird offer on their OWN blog for using their own light bulbs, then it is an offer. The other day I saw a retraction of an offer from my employer because it was a misprint of a legitimate offer. This kinda stuff happens all the time. My employer KNOWS how much trouble can be caused by people accepting their offer when it is put up on the web.
. ....then, If I don't get my money I will sue them.
***Your convoluted case actually makes the point of how significant this item was at the time, rather than "irrelevant" as the case pushed forward by the resident legal scholar here.
