Clearance Items

  • Your best hope to have Kirk's posts moved would have been to ask nicely. You instead saw yourself as entitled to such a service.

    I do not see myself as entitled. You're engaging in mindreading.


    You claim that one of your responsibilities is to keep a thread from getting hijacked. It doesn't say that one has to ask you "nicely".


    You seem to like to add a lot of layers to the simple tasks of unbiased moderating, which includes acknowledging that "some farm animals are more equal than others". Is Kirk one of those more equal farm animals? How do we get a list of these entitled farm animals? Keep in mind that it is this context by which I am engaging Kirk until you weigh in on whether or not he's a farm animal entitled to "more equality" than others. Kirk is a very nice person, when he is hijacking a thread.

  • It is more straightforward than Kirk being a favored participant. It is that you are perhaps furthest of all at being a favored participant; your presence here is suffered, because you are combative, you do not seem to know how to carry on a polite discussion, you brush aside points that are made and questions that are put to you with facile remarks and you are ever-ready to personalize things. You do not appear to understand our goal of maintaining decorum conducive to polite and reasonable debate; and, to the extent that you do understand it, you do not appear to care.


    Others are able to get away with this to a certain extent because they bring some other value to this forum; you, not so much.


    In such a context, do not be surprised if an entitled demand made of the mods falls on deaf ears. We are pretty ambivalent about your presence here.

  • It is more straightforward than Kirk being a favored participant. It is that you are perhaps furthest of all at being a favored participant; your presence here is suffered, because you are combative, you do not seem to know how to carry on a polite discussion, you brush aside points that are made and questions that are put to you with facile remarks and you are ever-ready to personalize things. You do not appear to understand our goal of maintaining decorum conducive to polite and reasonable debate; and, to the extent that you do understand it, you do not appear to care.


    Others are able to get away with this because they bring some other value to this forum; you, not so much.


    In such a context, do not be surprised if an entitled demand made of the mods falls on deaf ears. We are pretty ambivalent about your presence here.

    Ok, I get that you dislike me. I signed up in 2014 when this was a backwater. DIdn't pay much attention to Rossisez until the trial was gonna start because I didn't think the trial would ever move past settlement talks. So I didn't know that his had become the landing place for all the folks who were over at EcatNews. And I didn't know that one side is allowed to insult but the other side isn't.


    I was utterly surprised to find that you acknowledged "some farm animals are more equal than others". And now that Kirk is deliberately trying to derail for a 2nd time the discussion on the Peer Reviewed Replications thread even though he has his own thread, I can see that my presence is "suffered".


    Perhaps if you folks had stated it somewhere at the outset that you were the reincarnation of EcatNews, that your bias was heavily against Rossi, that you expect pro-Rossi postings to be "nice" while Anti-Rossi postings are allowed all the personal insults they want, and that the anti-Rossi bias extends to ordinary pre-Rossi threads, well then I would have known better, wouldn't I?


    If your desire is for polite and reasonable debate, then why aren't you promoting polite and reasonable debate when someone who has his own thread for his own pet theory is derailing another thread? That's neither polite nor reasonable for him to be doing that. It certainly lacks decorum. And there is nothing "personal" about noticing out such behavior openly.


    Eventually Rossi is going to fade away, again. The Peer Reviewed Replication thread has almost nothing to do with Rossi.

  • Quote

    Perhaps if you folks had stated it somewhere at the outset that you were the reincarnation of EcatNews, that your bias was heavily against Rossi, that you expect pro-Rossi postings to be "nice" while Anti-Rossi postings are allowed all the personal insults they want, and that the anti-Rossi bias extends to ordinary pre-Rossi threads, well then I would have known better, wouldn't I?

    Being against Rossi and considering him a crook requires no bias-- just a cursory examination of the facts, the history of the guy and his claims, his performance over six years and that's before you even get to the trial depositions and exhibits.

  • Being against Rossi and considering him a crook requires no bias-- just a cursory examination of the facts, the history of the guy and his claims, his performance over six years and that's before you even get to the trial depositions and exhibits.

    Being pro-Rossi nor anti-Rossi should have no bearing on a thread the discusses PRE-Rossi replications.

  • I don't understand what's going on anymore. You troll the hell (and it's hilarious) out of poor MY who's obviously a professional troll with a mission to debunk LENR, yet it seems you think LENR is a big nothingburger.
    Is this another good cop/bad cop tactic?

  • I don't understand what's going on anymore. You troll the hell (and it's hilarious) out of poor MY who's obviously a professional troll with a mission to debunk LENR, yet it seems you think LENR is a big nothingburger.
    Is this another good cop/bad cop tactic?


    LOL! Yes I do troll Mary once in a while although I know there are many other Roger Barker impersonators out there, hence why I'm The Real Roger Barker. Are you one of those impersonators Roger?


    You might find this surprising but I actually agree with a lot of what Mary Yugo says. Hir concerns about calorimetry and in particular insertion and positioning of probes are totally valid.



  • Moved from Rossi/Darden thread. Alan.

    Wyttenbach · Jul 29th 2017, 2:01 pm

    Dear fellows: A year ago Jed Rotwell placed a link that pointed to an infected jpg. It showed up on the Apple macintosh using the photobook services and the hacked photosanlysisd tool. This NSA tools was clumsy as it required regular spin.dumps to collect the info gather on your PC.

    Since yesterday I know that NSA (the persons behind the alias Eric Walker) are again regularly monitoring at least my Mac. The back door they use is the apple helpd (heldp process) service where they use the plugin injection method.

    This process obviously is started/stopped by marked downloads from the LENR-FORUM. Today they marked an Alfors post.

    The backend of the NSA tool is the Akamai (Mossad/NSA cover company since more than 20 years active) distributed service layer of our LENR-forum host cloudshare.

    The backlink of my NSA connection pointed to IP 2.20.222.194 own by AKAMAI (Europe)

    If you use an Apple macintosh then I recommend to kill the helpd process (over process monitor) as soon as it pops up. Further on you should block all back traffic to the subnet 2.20.*.* may be more are needed.


    I have deep knowledge about NSA trapdoors since about 18 years. The sad news I have for Microsoft PC users is: NSA has full access to all PC's worldwide as soon as they are online – you won't be able to notice them. MS is fully cooperating with NSA (Apple not directly..) and delivers them an encrypted service password to directly access your system. The only – cumbersome - way to block them is to build your own router using a preconfigured rasperi phi and block all IP's related to them. This includes all MS addresses, which you must open for updates again...

    In case of questions mail me at [email protected]. If you don't get an answer, then your mail was possibly captured.

    The preceding post was sent to me via my email address as a notification from LENR Forum. I'm not commenting on the subject matter, but after a fairly extensive search I cannot find the forum heading in which the post was made. Can someone please direct me as I would like to follow the string directly following the post. Rionrlty


    Sorry Rends I think you misunderstood. I didn't write the post I just wanted to follow up on it. It came to me as a notification on my email, but with no clear way to trace what forum is was posted on. Any help from someone out there? Rionrlty

  • Quote

    Dear fellows: A year ago Jed Rotwell placed a link that pointed to an infected jpg. It showed up on the Apple macintosh using the photobook services and the hacked photosanlysisd tool. This NSA tools was clumsy as it required regular spin.dumps to collect the info gather on your PC.


    Sounds like complete garbage. Unless, of course, you want to provide a copy of the jpg with the link. I will be happy to check it for malware. Also, it is unclear from the post why it is being posted and who said what.

  • reckon that the picture of the QuackEx was released for the sole purpose of discovering just what features evoked criticism, so that these may be the more thoroughly obfuscated in any future displays

    If you really think that you are an idiot. If you don't think that you are simply being a troll/


    Moved from the Rossi v. Darden aftermath thread. Eric

  • Note to mods - please don't remove AA's mini-rant.

    Thanks for quoting me. Despite your request my comment (In answer to your reply) was removed.

    Apparently it is OK to accuse Rossi of being fraud. thief, conman, criminal etc., but pointing out a troll is forbidden. I hadn't realized that was a criminal offense.


    Moved from the Rossi v. Darden aftermath thread. Eric

  • Note to mods - please don't remove AA's mini-rant.


    Posts from Adrian that do nothing more than attack another forum member will be moved to the bargain bin with prejudice. Broken windows and all of that. These exchanges can take on a life of their own, especially from people who show little interest in engaging substantive points. Posts from Adrian that complain about moderator actions will be dealt with similarly.


    Failure to address a substantive point ⇒ post is slightly at risk.

    Failure to address a substantive point, instead attacking a forum member ⇒ post is at significant risk.

    Regularly fail to address substantive points and often simply attack other forum members ⇒ individual's activity is closely monitored, and posts without substantive points are at even more risk.