• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

Skepticism and The Normal

I would also like to chime on BF's behavior as someone who did not know about him prior to his thread here. I have been a poster here since November of 2006, and have been fairly active.

I opened my discussion with BF because he seemed to have some interesting things to talk about. I thought his ideas were flawed and incorrect, but he seemed open to discussion. We ended up talking about mathematical concepts for a while here. He made some statements he later dodged around, and had some interesting misconceptions about elements of basic number theory that were at least fun to talk about, if nothing else.

However, Googling his posting history revealed a long string of the same thing. He pops into a forum, spams out stuff about OS 012, pretends to discuss it, modifies nothing, acknowledges nothing, claims OS 012 is perfect and superior to everything, claims he is always right, claims he has won, and moves on.

He admits to developing this stupid thing as an internet meme, and appears to be focused on moving OS 012 around the internet, rather than actually hashing out elements of the system itself. I think several posters here have made convincing, logical, well reasoned arguments against several things BF has said, but he just kind of blows it off.

Learning about his behavior on other forums, and seeing his silly behavior towards other posters (not me though, probably because I tried very hard to be polite towards him) was kind of a kick in the nuts.

I like to debate people, even people with insane ideas, if they're actually open to civilized debate. BF seemed to be more about trolling message boards and being a jerk to people who weren't nice to him or disagreed with him about certain things. Eff that noise.
 
Yeah, whatever he said........
I've said on this thread already that I came here to abuse Bubb, that and to try and give a heads up to the likes of Jonny.
It's not possible to debate sensibly with Bubb, I've tried.
 
Originally Posted by Gnu Ordure
Actually, this gives me an idea for the next episode of the Bubb Show: why don't you all go over to his site, storm the citadel, and try to blow him out of the water once and for all ?
Click to expand...

I'm with Prof Yaffle, this has pretty much convinced me that Gnu is Bubb or an associate of his. I reckon this is just an attempt to continue the sorry proceedings that seem so entertain him so much and get some hits for his little vanity project at the same time.
 
sinnikal said:
Yeah, whatever he said........
I've said on this thread already that I came here to abuse Bubb, that and to try and give a heads up to the likes of Jonny.
It's not possible to debate sensibly with Bubb, I've tried.
Click to expand...

Which was actually a big help. I had no idea that this wasn't BF's first foray into this exact same discussion.
 
The find more posts function seems only to include the last 300 posts. I checked JonnyFive who has over 2000 posts, and the search only came back with 300 as well.
 
If you want to find earlier posts, use the advanced search, and chose the "posts older than x months option". I got back to my first post that way. Yes, it was on this thread.

I can't see why BF would complain about people following him from bad science when he started the discussion here by referencing and completely mischaracterising what happened there.
 
Professor Yaffle said:
I can't see why BF would complain about people following him from bad science when he started the discussion here by referencing and completely mischaracterising what happened there.
Click to expand...

I was extremely suspicious when he came here claiming to have "destroyed" the people over at bs.net with his amazing OS 012 system.

To be fair, I always thought his OS 012 was at best obvious, and at worst a load of utter crap. However, I didn't know how much of a troll he'd been since the people from bs.net came over and I started Googling his posting on other boards.

I'm sure he'll make the same claim about the people here, so whatever.
 
I seem to remember earlier in this thread, BF said the next place he was going to post was on Richard Dawkins forums. I wonder if he is doing that right now?
 
Pah, I totally destroyed him with my multi-axis sliding scale of logical thinking. He never came back with a rebuttal, and seemed to ignore me after that. I still win. ;)

(Although I will give Jimbob credit for the multi-multi-axis bit.)
 
I'd also like to thank the tag team member who added "nonsense" to this thread's tags a while ago. :)

Unless it was BF himself, in which case he displayed a surprising level of insight.
 
Hokulele said:
Pah, I totally destroyed him with my multi-axis sliding scale of logical thinking. He never came back with a rebuttal, and seemed to ignore me after that. I still win. ;)

(Although I will give Jimbob credit for the multi-multi-axis bit.)
Click to expand...

The trouble with our current proposed alternative is that it is not baroque enough and might have some slight validity.

It is also too intuitive.

Any suggestions for further needless complexity?
 
jimbob said:
The trouble with our current proposed alternative is that it is not baroque enough and might have some slight validity.

It is also too intuitive.

Any suggestions for further needless complexity?
Click to expand...

Your problem is that you two are too up-front with your system. You need to conceal more of it behind closed doors and non-disclosure agreements.

I would suggest adding in a few random metrics, such as additional meta-axes, and making sure that they don't really correllate to the other axes you have for your system.

Also, give everything esoteric names, and formulate complex rules for resolution of logical problems within your system but don't tell anyone what they are.

The first rule of BS 1234 is obfuscation. Everything else is just icing. ;)
 
Also, don't forget to come up with as many possible applications for this particular nostrum, even if they have absolutely nothing to do with its functions! After all, if OS 012 can bring about world peace and cure your gout, who's to say BS 1234 can't go one better?
 
flim said :
I'm with Prof Yaffle, this has pretty much convinced me that Gnu is Bubb or an associate of his
Click to expand...


sigh...

the Prof said :

Gnu, I disagreed with the others that thought you were Bubblebrain until now. But with that last post you are doing a pretty good job of convincing me I was wrong.
Click to expand...


double-sigh...

(note: for some reason I'm not quite sure of, I feel really quite depressed by this; I really thought my text-analysis suggestion had knocked the sock-puppet idea on the head, but obviously not.

And I now realize that if I'm going to stay on this Forum, I had better double-check everything I write from the point of view of someone who suspects I'm Bubb, in order to eliminate anything that might give credence to that suspicion.

Which I obviously failed to do with my last post).

Still, I have learned something else: my skin is not as thick as I thought it was. I knew before my I offered my interpretation of Bubb's activities that I could expect a certain amount of flak, and I thought it wouldn't bother me.

But it does.

(When I say 'something else' : first, I've learned how to spell 'suspicion' (see above); second, I've learned to never, ever make jokes about being someone's sock-puppet).

So, it was dumb of me to provide a link to Bubb's site, because that could be interpreted as Bubb trying to increase his hit-count....

And it was dumb of me to suggest that you go there and confront him, because that could be interpreted as Bubb trying to stimulate more meaningless debate...

sigh....

Yes, I see it now, but last night I didn't, ok ?

What happened yesterday was that I was reading one of the threads on Bubb's site, in which he was having a go at an old aversary, David Quinn, who runs his own Forum (The Genius Forum) - and Mr Quinn then joined Bubb's site to defend himself on the thread.

So, given that Bubb said some ridiculous things about you guys in the thread I linked to, it occurred to me that you could do the same thing ie go over there and sort him out...

So I naively (and only semi-seriously) suggested it...

(One of the reasons for doing so was a couple of you saying that you were unwilling to ignore Bubb completely on this thread, as I've been suggesting, in case it was assumed that your silence implied that you agreed with him. So when Bubb says on his own site "The problem with badscience.net is that they were ALL trolls", shouldn't you therefore as a matter of principle go and defend yourselves ?

And I admit that was a devil's advocate argument, because I disagree with the first part of it anyway: in my opinion, ignoring a nonsensical argument should not/cannot be interpreted as supporting it.)

jqh said :

ie both Mojo and I joined prior to this year, jimbob did not make his first posting here. Your "pursue" argument is falling apart. Incidently, do you monitor everybody to see where they posted first, or are we eight special targets?
Click to expand...

OK, a retraction; I did say you guys hounded Bubb out of badscience, but I don't know exactly what parts you individually played in that process, so that was unfounded.

But I do stand by you pursuing him; like a pack; of hounds; after a fox.

But why is that such a bone of contention, jqh ? there's nothing wrong with playing fox and hounds; Bubb invites it, as I said.

So why deny it so vigorously, as you and flim do ?

And of course you're not targets; I made my metaphorical comparison without checking the facts; Mojo called me on it, so then I checked them, OK ?

And I now contend that the facts support my point; you all followed Bubb here, (in a pack), to continue your conversation with him:

Look, here's the date of you all joining the JREF, followed by the date of your first post to this thread , followed by the number of posts to the thread :

The Professor: 31/1/07 --- 31/1/07 --- 162
sinnikal.........: 31/1/07 --- 31/1/07 --- 93
pv+.............: 31/1/07 --- 02/2/07 --- 143
flim .............: 16/2/07 --- 16/2/07 --- 180
zooterkin......: 21/3/07 --- 23/3/07 --- 70
jimbob .........: 19/1/07 --- 30/1/07 --- 137
jqh..............: 06/7/06 --- 03/2/07 --- 20

The implication of the dates is that all of you (except jqh) joined this forum in order to converse with Bubb - as I said.

The implication of the number of posts is that you didn't join up simply to issue a warning.



You were here already, jqh, agreed. But you didn't post here at all until the rest of the pack arrived.

I don't see how you can deny it. And why bother anyway ?

The Professor admits she followed Bubb here because she likes arguing with idiots. Fair enough. Jimbob said 'ditto'. Sinnikal says he came here to abuse Bubb. Fair enough.

I'm guessing pv wouldn't deny he came here to give bubb an earful. That's four out of seven.

Zooterkin ? What do you say ?



Flim denies it, though. He said :

I think you’re wrong. I, and I guess many others, came here to warn others about Bubb and to converse with the other forum members
Click to expand...


Flim, is this selective memory, or what ? You joined in here on page 25, way after warnings had been given by sinnikal and others. I've just re-read your first 5 posts here, they are all lengthy posts addressed directly to Bubb and his ideas, not to other Forum members.

And where did you issue a warning ? I can't find it.

So this directly contradicts your statement, doesn't it ? So are you trying to fool me, or are you fooling yourself ?




Is this level of detail important ? I think it is. How can we deconstruct Bubb's behaviour and motivation if we can't be honest and accurate about our own ?

I have tried to be honest here; I decided to share my interpretation of Bubb with all of you because I thought it might be useful; I should have realized that it would be seen as a defense of him, and I should have realized that you would mistrust me because of that.

And in the absence of Bubb, the pack has turned on me....



... Woe, woe, and thrice woe.


(Damn, this always happens; I get a good self-pitying depression going, and I then suddenly lurch into parody and start laughing at myself. Oh well).


OK, I must go - the levels of paranoia and suspicion that I've contributed to are now doing my head in. Enough already.

I've said my bit. (One more time, in case you missed it : I think Bubb is a performance artist, or some such - the starting point is always the same, Jonny, but the performance is always different).


I leave you,

an older, sadder,

slightly wiser,



Gnu.




.
 
Last edited:
jimbob said:
The trouble with our current proposed alternative is that it is not baroque enough and might have some slight validity.

It is also too intuitive.

Any suggestions for further needless complexity?
Click to expand...


If you can't fix it, it ain't baroque.

Regarding complexity, rather than numbering or lettering the axes, let's give them arabic star names. Dibs on Algol.
 
Gnu Ordure said:
Zooterkin ? What do you say ?
Click to expand...
I'm really unclear on your reason for this post, and why you have appointed yourself BF's guardian, or whatever it is you feel you are doing. I have already stated my reasons for posting here.

If you think any of us has done something wrong, why don't you come out and say so. Otherwise I really don't see what is to be gained by your analysis of the posts. And why, for example, did you choose to leave Mojo out?

The best way to convince me that you're not Bubb would have been to drop out of this conversation some time ago. Making statements like
How can we deconstruct Bubb's behaviour and motivation if we can't be honest and accurate about our own ?
Click to expand...
is not going to help. Do you really believe that the minor inconsistencies that you allege are anything remotely like what BF has been doing?

ETA: Despite that last paragraph, I still don't believe that you are BF/Rome, but you certainly seem to have some of the same disingenuousness, and abilitiy to overlook the bleeding obvious while picking nits.
 
Last edited:
Gnu Ordure said:
Look, here's the date of you all joining the JREF, followed by the date of your first post to this thread , followed by the number of posts to the thread :

The Professor: 31/1/07 --- 31/1/07 --- 162
sinnikal.........: 31/1/07 --- 31/1/07 --- 93
pv+.............: 31/1/07 --- 02/2/07 --- 143
flim .............: 16/2/07 --- 16/2/07 --- 180
zooterkin......: 21/3/07 --- 23/3/07 --- 70
jimbob .........: 19/1/07 --- 30/1/07 --- 137
jqh..............: 06/7/06 --- 03/2/07 --- 20

The implication of the dates is that all of you (except jqh) joined this forum in order to converse with Bubb - as I said.
Click to expand...


You missed one. ;)

I've said my bit.
Click to expand...


I notice it didn't include any attempt to defend this assertion (originally made by Bubblefish):
Gnu Ordure said:
re the insults. In this respect I think Bubb is more sinned against than sinning. He responds to how people treat him; he's polite if they're polite. He's sarcastic if they're sarcastic. And so on.
Click to expand...



ETA: I'd better come clean here and admit that I have at least once addressed an unprovoked insult at Bubblefish (in his "TM" incarnation over at badscience).

The interesting thing is that on that occasion he didn't respond in kind. Not only does he respond to politeness with insults, he also fails to respond to insults with further insults. So much for his "tit for tat".
 
Last edited:
I'm really unclear on your reason for this post,
Click to expand...

That was supposed to be my final post, zoot.

I signed off :

I leave you,

an older, sadder,

slightly wiser,



Gnu.
Click to expand...

... because I had reached the same conclusion as you, that :

The best way to convince me that you're not Bubb would have been to drop out of this conversation some time ago
Click to expand...


... so I'm doing it now, zoot, ok ?

though, actually, what I'll do is make this post, and, if there are any responses I want to address, (as I wish to adress yours and Mojo's), I'll make one last post in say, a week's time, and then I'll be gone, OK ? An orderly retreat...

If you think any of us has done something wrong, why don't you come out and say so
Click to expand...


I don't think any of you have done anything wrong.

Otherwise I really don't see what is to be gained by your analysis of the posts. And why, for example, did you choose to leave Mojo out?
Click to expand...


I'm defining a set, zoot, thus :

There is a set, the members of which :

1. engaged with Bubb on the badscience forum

and who

2. had not, at that time, ever posted on JREF

and who

3. subsequently engaged with Bubb on JREF


As far as I know, this set comprises 7 members. I initially included Mojo in it, in error, so I then removed his name.

OK ?

So, I was curious about the motivation behind this behaviour, I didn't understand it, and I enquired about it. Why ? 'Cos I'm a nosy bastard.

(To be clear, this is what I don't understand: when Bubb appeared at badscience, Mojo immediately issued a warning, which was ignored. A long, apparently pointless thread ensued, a waste of time by most accounts. So, I don't understand why seven people would want to re-engage with Bubb on another forum, and repeat the process...)

The Prof and Jim said they like arguing with idiots. Fair enough, I've done it myself, it's a fun game.

And 'arguing with idiots' would be a game, wouldn't it, Prof/Jim ?

So...

... you're playing a game with Bubb.

And Bubb's playing a game with you.

Everyone has fun.

It's a win-win.



Gnu.







PS

I notice it didn't include any attempt to defend this assertion (originally made by Bubblefish):

Originally Posted by Gnu Ordure :

re the insults. In this respect I think Bubb is more sinned against than sinning. He responds to how people treat him; he's polite if they're polite. He's sarcastic if they're sarcastic. And so on
Click to expand...
.
Click to expand...

Mojo, I think it would be impossible to prove this one way or the other; the insult situations develop gradually, it'd be like trying to decide "Who started it ?" in a play-ground fight.

You're honest enough to admit :

I'd better come clean here and admit that I have at least once addressed an unprovoked insult at Bubblefish (in his "TM" incarnation over at badscience).
Click to expand...

I'm willing to concede that Bubb may also have made unprovoked attacks himself...

Could we not agree that it might be six of one, half a dozen of the other... ?
 
Last edited:
Gnu Ordure said:
Mojo, I think it would be impossible to prove this one way or the other; the insult situations develop gradually, it'd be like trying to decide "Who started it ?" in a play-ground fight.
Click to expand...
Except in this case we have a complete record of who said what, and when, and this point has already been addressed, with examples, in this thread, if memory serves.
 
Gnu Ordure said:
I'm willing to concede that Bubb may also have made unprovoked attacks himself...
Click to expand...


The difference is that I have never claimed to only use insults in response to other insults, as Bubblefish has while persistently being insulting without provocation.
Could we not agree that it might be six of one, half a dozen of the other... ?
Click to expand...
As far as I'm aware that's the only time I've insulted him. He does it consistently.
 
Whew, have I been busy! Finally just wrapped a major project and will have some time before the next one begins next week. I can't believe this thread is still going. Anyway, I will slowly be returning to this discussion this week.

And hey Mojo, just read your last post there, and all I have to say is a big 'HUH'?

we get what we put into this discussion. it's been going on for over half a year now. we officially have a relationship.

the difference is I have absolutly no hostility towards any of you, am actually quite fond of many of you (including the cranky Doc Kitten and the squimish PV). I would sit down to drinks and laughs with just about anyone here.

Should we have a re-union? It could be fun!



Bubblefish
 
I would probably agree that in many cases, BF is directly insulted before he insults. However this is because the insults are in direct response to his behaviour. He acts like a twunt for so long that you can't help calling him one.
 
Bubb, the only thing I have to add at this point is that until you can provide me with some testable evidence that you actually sat down and discussed this with someone who teaches logic or philosophy for a living, so I can check his side of the story and find out what if anything he thought of it, I have no further use for OS 012 in any form.
 
What's this? Bubb comes back just as Gnu signs off, promising never to post again? Call me suspiscsious, but that just doesn't feel right.

Flim, is this selective memory, or what ? You joined in here on page 25, way after warnings had been given by sinnikal and others. I've just re-read your first 5 posts here, they are all lengthy posts addressed directly to Bubb and his ideas, not to other Forum members.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I did choose to take the time to consider Bubb's/Gnu's idea seriously. It's bollocks. Within a few posts you can see that I've pointed out that it's bollocks and that Bubb still hasn't explained anything or really engaged at all. Given that these messages were (and are) available to all, I'd say that constitutes a warning of sorts.

... you're playing a game with Bubb.

And Bubb's playing a game with you.

Everyone has fun.

It's a win-win.
Click to expand...

Wrong, Bubb is playing a game with us and getting some wort of pathetic thrill from it. We are trying to engage in a serious discussion and exchange of views partly in order to try to offer advice and information to someone who appears to be seriously misinformed about a whole heap of stuff. It turns out that person is a liar and a troll and is simply posting for the attention. Win-win? No, Bubb get's his boner from being so "clever" and we have our time wasted and our blood pressures raised (yes you are annoying Bubb; there's that boner again!)

I think Bubb is a performance artist, or some such - the starting point is always the same, Jonny, but the performance is always different
Click to expand...

Well in that case could I remind Bubb/Rome that people came here to participate in a discussion and don't want to be involved in some piece of third-rate performance art. Could I therefore invite him to f*** off and stop wasting our time.
 
flimflam_machine said:
What's this? Bubb comes back just as Gnu signs off, promising never to post again? Call me suspiscsious, but that just doesn't feel right..
Click to expand...


By the way, do you remember "Celine Hagbard", who made one post on badscience supporting TM but then thought better of it and deleted it? I vaguely recall the style and content being similar to Gnu's.

Bubb says he's a big fan of Robert Anton Wilson, by the way.
 
Mojo said:
Bubb says he's a big fan of Robert Anton Wilson, by the way.
Click to expand...

Why does this not surprise me in the slightest? RAW seems to be a favorite author among woos, especially among woos who think they're smarter than the "average" woo -- i.e., one who slags The Secret and Oprah-style "psychics" but thinks there's something to that water-memory thing, without ever realizing they're cobbled together from the same intellectual refuse.
 
Just for completeness:

Gnu made his first post a couple of weeks after registering. He made his first post in this thread and has made very few posts anywhere on this forum except this thread and his own off shoot of it. He only seems to post when Bubb is "busy" (and vice versa). He has recently registered at another forum that bubb posts at, but hasn't made any posts himself yet.

Feel free to use this info to draw your own conclusions.

Edit to add - I learned what ordure means today.
 
Last edited:
Professor Yaffle said:
Just for completeness:

Gnu made his first post a couple of weeks after registering. He made his first post in this thread and has made very few posts anywhere on this forum except this thread and his own off shoot of it. He only seems to post when Bubb is "busy" (and vice versa). He has recently registered at another forum that bubb posts at, but hasn't made any posts himself yet.

Feel free to use this info to draw your own conclusions.
Click to expand...

Prof., I think Bubb would draw the conclusion that you are in 'love' with him as 'evidenced' by your 'obsessive behaviour' following him round the infoweb superhighway. Come to think of it Gnu would probably draw much the same;)
 
... sigh ...


I wouldn't mind if I was being accused of lying; maybe then I could disprove the lie; and if I couldn't, the worst would be that I would be considered a liar.

But no; I am being accused of not existing. I am accused of being the figment of someone else's imagination.

Which is a bit weird, to be honest. I don't believe it's ever happened to me before.

I would have thought beforehand that this wouldn't be a problem - to prove that I exist - but it evidently is.

Which is also weird.


And while I wrestle with this problem, some of you are exhibiting text-book symptoms of paranoia; and I don't mean to be rude, but some of you are attempting to prove your hypothesis that I am Bubb in a most unscientific manner.

It is generally accepted that it is not possible for a psychiatrist to cure a patient of their paranoia by the application of reason and logic. Any rational confrontation is simply incorporated by the patient into his delusion.

You believe I'm Bubb. Anything that I do or say is interpreted in such a way that it supports that belief.

eg

He has recently registered at another forum that bubb posts at, but hasn't made any posts himself yet.

... snip .. Draw your own conclusions
Click to expand...

You were referring to FreedomCrowNest, Prof ? The forum that a couple of pages ago you provided a link to ?

I followed your link, checked what Bubb was up to, read a few threads, and found some woo that I wanted to reply to, so I signed up. I then realized that the woo was so ridiculous and wide-ranging that I didn't want to get involved.

And yet according to you, my actions are somehow supportive of the proposition that I am Bubb ?

Flim:

What's this? Bubb comes back just as Gnu signs off, promising never to post again?
Click to expand...

That Bubb, he is a card, isn't he ?

Dropped me right in it there, didn't he ?

Think about it, Flim. There's already been a discussion about the fact my first appearence here coincided wtih Bubb's absence, and how suspicious that was. Do you really think Bubb would be so stupid as to repeat that, thereby provoking another wave of suspicion, as we have now ?

After all, if he was me, he'd want to keep it quiet; because he'd be banned if it was found out.

And here's the beauty of paranoid thinking; you simply say that this is a double-bluff.

And I have no answer to that - because it might be.

third example :

Edit to add - I learned what ordure means today
Click to expand...


Prof, I didn't realize until about a month after I registered how my moniker might be interpreted. I knew about the excrement part, but a friend later pointed out that a male wildebeest might be known as a 'bull', and so my handle effectively reads : 'B*llsh*t".

And you're now taking that to be further evidence that I'm Bubb, is that correct ?

... sigh ...


I'll tell you the truth, for what it's worth: at the time I registered, I happened to be listening to a New Order cd; the pun suggested itself, I took it.


fourth...

And chose to continue posting in this thread despite being invited to discuss the nature of beauty elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Mojo, this is a travesty. That thread was started by z. I was already talking to him here on the same subject; I said I was happy to transfer the discussion over there, if he thought it appropriate.. I was the newbie, he was the old hand, I took my lead from him. At one point, I asked "did anyone mind" if I carried on the discussion, given Bubb's absence: nobody said they minded.

And now those actions are seen as suspicious...




See what I mean ? Your paranoia is such that innocent actions are seen as sinister...





I said just now :

"some of you are attempting to prove your hypothesis that I am Bubb in a most unscientific manner."

You have this hypothesis. You search for evidence. Bubb writes in short sentences. So does Gnu. Bubb sometimes spells words wrong. So does Gnu. Bubb's theory has three parts. So does Gnu's.

(At the same time, you ignore any evidence that doesn't support your theory. Bubb uses American spelling, Gnu English. Bubb mis-spells common words; Gnu mis-spells more complex words).

I'm pretty sure you know this is not science; and if it leads you to believe that you have proved that I am Bubb, then your methodology must be wrong.

Because I know for a fact, as certainly as I can be certain of anything, that I am not Bubb, and that you are wrong.


Here's an idea; why not use the proper scientific method ?

You have your hypothesis; propose an experiment that would test it, prove it one way or another...

I cannot think of one myself. Earlier tonight, I was considering asking Mojo for his address in London, and then driving over to see him with my passport to prove that I was not RV.

And then I realized that this would prove nothing. According to the paranoid perspective, I could be a friend of Bubb's in London, who'd been asked by him to pretend to be a separate person, and who actually had nothing to do with the Forum, where all Gnu's posts had in fact been made by Bubb.

So, come on, I'm asking now; does anyone know a way to settle this ? Can anyone suggest an experiment that would test the hypothesis ?

If not, I'll do as zoot suggested, and just withdraw...


Gnu.
 
Last edited:
Prof., I think Bubb would draw the conclusion that you are in 'love' with him as 'evidenced' by your 'obsessive behaviour' following him round the infoweb superhighway. Come to think of it Gnu would probably draw much the same
Click to expand...


Well, it hadn't occurred to me, sinnikal, but I did say I was looking for a girl-friend...

so maybe ...

actually, no, I don't think it would work. After all, me and the Prof, this would be a relationship originating in an atmosphere of mistrust, suspicion and paranoia, wouldn't it ? Not exactly propitious...

I can see how it would end up.

Before long, this would be "our song":


We're caught in a trap
I can't walk out
Because I love you too much baby

Why can't you see
What you're doing to me
When you don't believe a word I say?

We can't go on together
With suspicious minds
And we can't build our dreams
On suspicious minds

So, if an old friend I know
Drops by to say hello
Would I still see suspicion in your eyes?

Here we go again
Asking where I've been
You can't see these tears are real
I'm crying

We can't go on together
With suspicious minds
And be can't build our dreams
On suspicious minds

Oh let our love survive
Or dry the tears from your eyes
Let's don't let a good thing die

When honey, you know
I've never lied to you
Mmm yeah, yeah




So, no offense, Prof, but I reckon we should just be friends, if that's OK ?

What's that ? We can't be friends because you don't believe I exist ?

Yes, that is a bit of a stumbling-block, isn't it ?

I know, why don't you just imagine I exist ?

I'll settle for that. I admit I was hoping for a girl-friend (or at least a hot date), but if the only thing on offer is to be somebody's imaginary friend... well, I guess that's better than nothing.

Just.




Gnu.
 
Last edited:
All totally off-topic.

OK, Gnu, whether you're Rome or not is utterly irrelevant at the moment. The important thing is, either there's more to discuss on the topic of this thread, or there isn't. Your existence or non-existence is irrelevant and meaningless, with regards to this thread.

So either let's stop the drama and carry on with whatever discussion may still be wrung from this apparently dry and somewhat mildewy rag of a topic, or let's stop the drama and let this thread die the indignant and long-drawn-out death it deserved several hundred posts ago.
 
All totally off-topic.
Click to expand...

Well, excuse me.

After I posted yesterday, there were 11 replies, 8 of which were either to me or about me.

Off-topic or not, I felt entitled to respond.

OK, Gnu, whether you're Rome or not is utterly irrelevant at the moment.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant to you, perhaps.

Not to me.

And presumably not to those that keep raising the subject...


My request for an experimental procedure still stands...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom