amindformurder.com web site ceases in settlement

[Sherlock]

Under a settlement agreement a critical web site which examined the claims of Noreen Renier (www.amindformurder.com) has ceased as of today. This follows Ms. Renier's providing a payment of $9000 to a U.S. Bankruptcy Trustee (under her Chapter 7 filing) to re-acquire the copyright for her book by that name, and a lesser payment for the removal of the conflicting web site.

As the principal creditor in the dispute and the initial user of the web site domain I will be paid the majority of the $9000 together with several thousand dollars of collected assets from book royalties, and also the majority of two other asset funds. The settlement ends future references to one another with serious repercussions enforced by a federal court hereafter.

This posting therefore will be the last under amindformurder and is here to inform that any future use of amindformurder and the matching web site will be independent and unrelated, including any follow-ups to the present 'John Merrill' postings. The web site domain will become publicly available sometime after October 15, 2010 and is presently held by Brinkster Communications Corporation. My avatar shall remain as the Sherlock logo is and shall remain my trademark.

 

[Starthinker]

Under a settlement agreement a critical web site which examined the claims of Noreen Renier (www.amindformurder.com) has ceased as of today. This follows Ms. Renier's providing a payment of $9000 to a U.S. Bankruptcy Trustee (under her Chapter 7 filing) to re-acquire the copyright for her book by that name, and a lesser payment for the removal of the conflicting web site.

As the principal creditor in the dispute and the initial user of the web site domain I will be paid the majority of the $9000 together with several thousand dollars of collected assets from book royalties, and also the majority of two other asset funds. The settlement ends future references to one another with serious repercussions enforced by a federal court hereafter.

This posting therefore will be the last under amindformurder and is here to inform that any future use of amindformurder and the matching web site will be independent and unrelated, including any follow-ups to the present 'John Merrill' postings. The web site domain will become publicly available sometime after October 15, 2010 and is presently held by Brinkster Communications Corporation. My avatar shall remain as the Sherlock logo is and shall remain my trademark.

Your link doesn't work.

 

[Geek Goddess]

Who are you?

 

[Olowkow]

http://www.commentarybysherlock.com/

 

[Brattus]

And we care why?

 

[Stellafane]

Who are you?

And we care why?

Translation: How dare you try to announce something here in the forum without being one of the Popular Kids? So just for that, we'll post a couple of snarky remarks just so you, you know, know your place in the future.

 

[tesscaline]

And we care why?

A "psychic" got smacked down, if I'm reading things correctly. This is a good thing.

 

[Frying Dutchmen]

Translation: How dare you try to announce something here in the forum without being one of the Popular Kids? So just for that, we'll post a couple of snarky remarks just so you, you know, know your place in the future.

Translation, I don't understand what a question is so I make a post about saying how you can't question a post that is ambiguous because that would be snarky or shooting down.

 

[Stellafane]

Translation, I don't understand what a question is so I make a post about saying how you can't question a post that is ambiguous because that would be snarky or shooting down.

Yeah, right -- and just how do the questions "Who are you?" and "We care why?" serve to clarify an "ambiguous" post? If that first question had been posted by a noob, about five of the usual regulars would have been all over it with "use the search function, stupid" type posts. As for the second question, hell I'll just let its snarkiness stand on its own without further comment.

Ask all the questions you want, so long as you're genuinely and sincerely interested in learning more. But when all you're doing is belittling the poster for not being more popular, you're basically trolling.

 

[Starthinker]

Yes, I posted a snarky remark, but that's kind of what I do. And in spite of his/hers 156 posts I had never seen amindformurder before, had no idea what the website was about, and a little more information/background in the OP would have gone a long way to explaining things. I think the issue is not that anyone is popular/unpopular, but that the OP doesn't really contain any information and that is what the snark is about, popularity has nothing to do with it. I still don't have any idea what the OP is about, and if anyone wanted to help, then by all means, explain it.

 

[Stellafane]

Yes, I posted a snarky remark, but that's kind of what I do. And in spite of his/hers 156 posts I had never seen amindformurder before, had no idea what the website was about, and a little more information/background in the OP would have gone a long way to explaining things. I think the issue is not that anyone is popular/unpopular, but that the OP doesn't really contain any information and that is what the snark is about, popularity has nothing to do with it. I still don't have any idea what the OP is about, and if anyone wanted to help, then by all means, explain it.

For the record, I had no problem with your reply.

As to what the OP is about, Noreen Renier is one of the more famous of the self-proclaimed "psychic detectives," regularly appearing on Court TV and other networks (in fact, her public profile is so high I'm a bit surprised she's apparently so little known in the forum). She's also author of the book "A Mind for Murder." John Merrell (who up to and including the OP posted here under the name "amindformurder," but apparently will do so no longer) operated a skeptical web site that examined the claims of Ms. Renier. This resulted in a court case, the outcome of which is announced in the OP of this thread.

Someone takes on a high-profile woo and is willing to go to court over it -- seems to me that deserves a bit more respect than "who are you and why should we care" comments.

 

[Starthinker]

Thanks. But the way the OP sounds to me is that somehow she won to have the web page taken down and that for a while someone else held the copyright to her book or something. Also, how does a bankruptcy play into this? And why was amindformurder collecting royalties on her book? Thanks for trying to explain, but "someone took on a psychic and won" doesn't quite jibe with what I'm reading in the OP. It looks like the psychic paid to have a web page critical of her taken down, which I'm sure in the psychic's eyes can be made to read "hey, I'm so good I got a web site critical of me taken down, therefore I'm legit." Okay, so she lost money in doing that but it looks like a victory for her.

Sorry, I'm still confused.

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

A quick look through amindformurder's posts might answer SOME of your questions, Starthinker....

He's only posted here extensively about the case and updated us on the progress of the trial.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Jeez!

Tom Lehrer once remarked about some overly wordy modern drama, "I think that the least that people who have trouble communicating could do is to just shut up."

Seems some of us ought to follow that advice.

John has posted here for about four years, on-and-off, and on this topic. If you have no interest in Journalist Debunks Psychic Gets Slammed in Court, Refuses to Give Up and May Have Ultimately Carried the Day, then don't bother posting.

 

[Uncayimmy]

Who are you?

Don't you know you can click on the member's name and select View More Posts? There's also a search feature (see upper right side). Those of us who hang out in GS&P have seen a number of his threads and posts, so the saga is familiar to us, and it is definitely appropriate for this forum. It's been going on for years. I'm surprised Skepchick isn't aware of it. CSICOP and other skeptic groups know about it.

 

[Starthinker]

Funny how prophetic this is...

Yeah, right -- and just how do the questions "Who are you?" and "We care why?" serve to clarify an "ambiguous" post? If that first question had been posted by a noob, about five of the usual regulars would have been all over it with "use the search function, stupid" type posts. As for the second question, hell I'll just let its snarkiness stand on its own without further comment.

Ask all the questions you want, so long as you're genuinely and sincerely interested in learning more. But when all you're doing is belittling the poster for not being more popular, you're basically trolling.

Criticizing people who respond with "use the search function" then the next three posts after mine do just that. I asked some genuine questions, as the second paragraph suggested, but oh well. I'm obviously not the only person who's never heard of this but I guess I'll just leave this thread to those of you who've been following the story with your feelings of superiority.

I think it's also funny how many "don't bother posting" posts I see, it's like you're wasting your time posting about how you think we're wasting your time. If you typed as many words answering some questions then no time would have been wasted at all.

Okay, go back to mumbling amongst yourselves, I'm putting this thread on hide.

 

[Dancing David]

For the record, I had no problem with your reply.

As to what the OP is about, Noreen Renier is one of the more famous of the self-proclaimed "psychic detectives," regularly appearing on Court TV and other networks (in fact, her public profile is so high I'm a bit surprised she's apparently so little known in the forum). She's also author of the book "A Mind for Murder." John Merrell (who up to and including the OP posted here under the name "amindformurder," but apparently will do so no longer) operated a skeptical web site that examined the claims of Ms. Renier. This resulted in a court case, the outcome of which is announced in the OP of this thread.

Someone takes on a high-profile woo and is willing to go to court over it -- seems to me that deserves a bit more respect than "who are you and why should we care" comments.

Um see , now you answered the question, thanks.

And no, you did not document any data about a noob and the search function, that was just speculative editorial on your part.

BTW: I had no idea who mindformurder was.