LostAngeles
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 22, 2004
- Messages
- 10,109
Oh no! The cartoons have come out! He really means it folks! Remember when Carlos and latinjral did the same? Shpdoinkel!
Audio Critic
- Thread starter jmercer
- Start date
making it impossible to win....
no no my friend, you must EARN that million dollars.
That's right, for a million dollars you have to be willing to believe in your claim enough to let it stand up to anything.
If someone can walk on water and Kramer pulls the plug from the swimming pool, then he'll just have to go to the ocean and WALK ON WATER.
If the difference is THAT vast, then it should be easy. Set it up on the sidewalk in front of JREF. Hand people that walk by headphones. Have a survey set up. Invite the press. Invite the press to try on the headphones. If you think the press won't show up, you don't know the press! They would LOVE a story like this.
But you need to earn that million dollars. And you had better have a million dollars worth of belief in your claim.
I really cant abide someone that does not have faith in their claims and beliefs.
come on, you sound smart enough to have thought of these alternatives for yourself.
Go for it!!!!
no no my friend, you must EARN that million dollars.
That's right, for a million dollars you have to be willing to believe in your claim enough to let it stand up to anything.
If someone can walk on water and Kramer pulls the plug from the swimming pool, then he'll just have to go to the ocean and WALK ON WATER.
If the difference is THAT vast, then it should be easy. Set it up on the sidewalk in front of JREF. Hand people that walk by headphones. Have a survey set up. Invite the press. Invite the press to try on the headphones. If you think the press won't show up, you don't know the press! They would LOVE a story like this.
But you need to earn that million dollars. And you had better have a million dollars worth of belief in your claim.
I really cant abide someone that does not have faith in their claims and beliefs.
come on, you sound smart enough to have thought of these alternatives for yourself.
Go for it!!!!
Beleth
FAQ Creator
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2002
- Messages
- 4,125
Re: My Last Words until March 2006
Look. It's clear, ath least to me, that the stuff after the -----end----- was a list of issues and next steps that Michael still had with the stuff before the -----end-----. This is how people in my line of work, technical business people, discuss things all the time. Okay, maybe he didn't communicate as crystally clear as you would have liked. If you seriously assume his good will, you will let him step out of this noose that he has unintentionally set up for himself.
I'm not sure why you are asking for these headers. As the sender of the message, Michael won't have access to the interesting ones.Gulliver said:
I don't see how a reasonable person can come to these conclusions and also assume good will on Michael's part. Especially after he says things like "I will review my comments to him on the Forum to see if there is anything I am forgetting" and "We will need to discuss whether burned copies or original CD’s are to be used". Obviously he still sees some rough edges to be smoothed out. You don't sign a contract when there are still rough edges, and it is unreasonable to assume that the other party would.
Look. It's clear, ath least to me, that the stuff after the -----end----- was a list of issues and next steps that Michael still had with the stuff before the -----end-----. This is how people in my line of work, technical business people, discuss things all the time. Okay, maybe he didn't communicate as crystally clear as you would have liked. If you seriously assume his good will, you will let him step out of this noose that he has unintentionally set up for himself.
Again, if you had good will toward him you would work with him to rectify the confusion and not yank the chair out from under him.
No comment, except to refer to what I said earlier about the value of this brinksmanship.
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
Wellfed is correct on this--he only wanted a month and a half:Wellfed said:
from page 4 of this thread, dated 03/21/2005, 06:43 PM
However, he wanted to wait till October to recover his calm for listening to "Vastly Superior" sound due to treatment.
Wellfed--you are guilty of misrepresentation. We all knew that October is 6 months away. You need until then to get ready, plus another 6 weeks?
What Bullrule8
edited to remove cartoon and avoid being labeld "Piano Teacher II"
jmercer said:I vote for this as the funniest damned post in the thread!
I had a good laugh as well, but not for as long as I did when I posted that Kramer would go absolutely ***** if I suggested that we'd still be testing the GSIC centuries from. This was in an early response to PianoTeacher who had suggested the possibility.
Can I vote for my own post? What is they say about someone that laughs at their own jokes?
Edit:
I need to add that no disrespect was intended towards PianoTeacher above. In reality he has my complete respect.
Edited by Darat:
Edited for breach of rule 8.
Responding to Beleth
First, let me express my respect for Beleth. The work on the FAQ was wondrous.
Now, let me respond carefully and compassionately to her critique of my comments.
Wellfed's copy of the headers even as the sender would include the date and time of the message. This would lend credence to his position if they matched the timeframe he claimed to have sent the email. Without the headers, I chose to extend the good will that his presentation was accurate. I do resent your implication otherwise.
I disagree with your position about signing a contract. For example, when buying a new car, you might very well sign the contract to order the car, not knowing the exact delivery date, color, VIN, or other details. I would also point out that one person whom I consider to be reasonable did indeed believe that Wellfed was submitting a protocol, KRAMER.
I feel no obligation to assist Wellfed because I extended good well to him in this analysis. If Wellfed were to ask, I would consider. At this point, however, I am responding to Wellfed's accusation about Kramer's decision.
I find your comment about brinksmanship interesting. Have your considered your comments about me and your own brinksmanship?
Finally, I regret the tone of my conclusion regarding insults, but I found Wellfed's attack on people I respect, including KRAMER and Winny, to require comment. I hope that you've expressed your concern to Wellfed too.
Carefully worded with respect and the hope of mutual understanding,
Gulliver
Beleth said:
First, let me express my respect for Beleth. The work on the FAQ was wondrous.
Now, let me respond carefully and compassionately to her critique of my comments.
Wellfed's copy of the headers even as the sender would include the date and time of the message. This would lend credence to his position if they matched the timeframe he claimed to have sent the email. Without the headers, I chose to extend the good will that his presentation was accurate. I do resent your implication otherwise.
I disagree with your position about signing a contract. For example, when buying a new car, you might very well sign the contract to order the car, not knowing the exact delivery date, color, VIN, or other details. I would also point out that one person whom I consider to be reasonable did indeed believe that Wellfed was submitting a protocol, KRAMER.
I feel no obligation to assist Wellfed because I extended good well to him in this analysis. If Wellfed were to ask, I would consider. At this point, however, I am responding to Wellfed's accusation about Kramer's decision.
I find your comment about brinksmanship interesting. Have your considered your comments about me and your own brinksmanship?
Finally, I regret the tone of my conclusion regarding insults, but I found Wellfed's attack on people I respect, including KRAMER and Winny, to require comment. I hope that you've expressed your concern to Wellfed too.
Carefully worded with respect and the hope of mutual understanding,
Gulliver
Re: My Last Words until March 2006
Thanks Gulliver, let me know if I've insulted you, I don't recall having done so. I've considered you to be one of the sensible around here, and I too consider your efforts to be in good will with the exception of your last paragraph.
I am not sure you are clear on this matter. EVERYTHING above the ---end--- mark are simply Steven Howard's words, not mine, with the exception of the subject line that is.
EVERYTHING after the ---end--- mark are my words. The email was sent to Kramer at his request. I was not submitting a protocol. He wanted to see Steven's proposal. He didn't want to look the Howard protocol up for himself for some reason. I thought it odd at the time, but it was no sweat to do so, so I did.
BTW, where did I ask for JREF's opinion? I can not see that anywhere in this email. Also how do I get you the headers you've requested?
Gulliver said:
Thanks Gulliver, let me know if I've insulted you, I don't recall having done so. I've considered you to be one of the sensible around here, and I too consider your efforts to be in good will with the exception of your last paragraph.
I am not sure you are clear on this matter. EVERYTHING above the ---end--- mark are simply Steven Howard's words, not mine, with the exception of the subject line that is.
EVERYTHING after the ---end--- mark are my words. The email was sent to Kramer at his request. I was not submitting a protocol. He wanted to see Steven's proposal. He didn't want to look the Howard protocol up for himself for some reason. I thought it odd at the time, but it was no sweat to do so, so I did.
BTW, where did I ask for JREF's opinion? I can not see that anywhere in this email. Also how do I get you the headers you've requested?
rwguinn said:
The protocol you present was never submitted to JREF for approval. It was simply posted on this thread for comment. I thought it was reasonable, Kramer considered the safe-deposit box a vanity. The funny thing is I thought I was thinking along the lines of you guys. I also found it amusing to see Mr. Randi standing in front of a vault in one of the photos of him in the Challenge application area of the JREF site.
My tabling of my claim until October 1 was not to recover my calm. It was to fully enjoy the events about to take place in my life. I know, I know, everyone thinks I should drop everything for a million bucks. I consider that type of thinking to be a vanity. It was a simple decision, deal with a deceptive megalomaniac while some of the most precious moments of my life are taking place, or sit back and enjoy my blessings? I went with logic on this one.
The recover my calm insistence, one of the few things I insisted as being necessary I might add, was specified to be 3 months after a protocol was set in stone. I chose to err on the side of caution. Actually I found it only took two day to recover my calm after Kramer's over the top actions just prior to the weekend I planned to do my original self-testing. If I were still in the game, I would continue to insist upon this unless it was legitimately a deal breaker. This would have all been a moot point had my original protocol been accepted by JREF. This protocol was at least good enough for Mr. Randi to say that it appeared proper and acceptable. I not the flaw discovered by TjW.
I don't question the ability of the GSIC, I question my ability to discern the effect 10 times, a task I consider to be quite rigorous, if not entirely focused on the task. PianoTeacher is one of the few here that is cognizant of the feeble nature of auditory perception.
webfusion
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2004
- Messages
- 9,774
(on 'ignore')
He has been saying this over and over, like a mantra, like a scratched old vinyl record, like he is preparing for a lawsuit.
I think that is what he really wants to do.
I see it was his intention from day one, intending to sue for libel (but not being able to, because the ridicule against him was being made by Mr Randi in good faith, since the basic assumption was the GSIC is a FRAUD, and truth is the ultimate defense against the claim of libel). Thus, Michael Anda hatched this plan, a plan not to win a million dollars, but to present a record that showed him to be perfectly reasonable and calm and polite, and the epitome of "due diligence" --- while he assumed that if he provoked the Challenge Admin. sufficiently, then KREAMER (spelling intentional) would go "apesh*t" and he would have his grounds for the lawsuit of breach of contract.
That's where this is now moving, I have no doubts.
He saw the empty bluff of other prior Challenge Applicants who threatened legal action (most obvious among them is the Irish Wit, Carey). He saw that they "jumped the gun" and went ahead claiming "foul" and threatened to sue way too early in their own rejection process!!!
Carey still, to this day, (in his mind, anyway) thinks that he will get some satisfaction from the JREF and be tested!
Anyway, the kernel of an idea formed in Mr Anda's head while sitting in the eerie glow of the computer's cathode-ray tube at his isolated cabin in the North Dakota wilderness:
Anda has me 'on ignore' (because I have no respect for him whatsoever, and had none right from the start of his charade) ----- However, I put this on the record:
Right here:
"What do you think?"
----------------end-----------------
He has been saying this over and over, like a mantra, like a scratched old vinyl record, like he is preparing for a lawsuit.
I think that is what he really wants to do.
I see it was his intention from day one, intending to sue for libel (but not being able to, because the ridicule against him was being made by Mr Randi in good faith, since the basic assumption was the GSIC is a FRAUD, and truth is the ultimate defense against the claim of libel). Thus, Michael Anda hatched this plan, a plan not to win a million dollars, but to present a record that showed him to be perfectly reasonable and calm and polite, and the epitome of "due diligence" --- while he assumed that if he provoked the Challenge Admin. sufficiently, then KREAMER (spelling intentional) would go "apesh*t" and he would have his grounds for the lawsuit of breach of contract.
That's where this is now moving, I have no doubts.
He saw the empty bluff of other prior Challenge Applicants who threatened legal action (most obvious among them is the Irish Wit, Carey). He saw that they "jumped the gun" and went ahead claiming "foul" and threatened to sue way too early in their own rejection process!!!
Carey still, to this day, (in his mind, anyway) thinks that he will get some satisfaction from the JREF and be tested!
Anyway, the kernel of an idea formed in Mr Anda's head while sitting in the eerie glow of the computer's cathode-ray tube at his isolated cabin in the North Dakota wilderness:
- Anda's Thought Pattern:
What if I applied for a Challenge, followed all the rules precisely, and offered no really glaring reasons for being rejected, then performed some slight, non-threatening antics which would irk the Challenge Facilitator greatly (knowing his typical reactions to similar 'stunts' -- including the famous "this weekend is a no-go" which is now JREF folklore) and the waffling resulted in my Application being thrown out?
Would I then have grounds for the lawsuit? I'll try it and see! It's worth a shot. Maybe end up with the million in court-awarded damages!
Anda has me 'on ignore' (because I have no respect for him whatsoever, and had none right from the start of his charade) ----- However, I put this on the record:
Right here:
"What do you think?"
----------------end-----------------
I can't reconcile your statements. Firstly you claim treated discs are vastly superior and that you have noticed a difference 25 times out of 25. Then you claim you won't be able to perform your own test on your own in the comfort of your own home because you are too stressed. And you claim you may not be able to do it 10 times out 10 again in the comfort of your own home for $1 million because someone you have never met has stressed you.
Please answer a simple question are treated discs really vastly superior to non treated discs or is the effect so subtle that people need to spend days clearing their minds of any stress before they will notice a difference? If the latter is true than I for one would never notice a difference as I doubt that I will ever be that unstressed.
Please answer a simple question are treated discs really vastly superior to non treated discs or is the effect so subtle that people need to spend days clearing their minds of any stress before they will notice a difference? If the latter is true than I for one would never notice a difference as I doubt that I will ever be that unstressed.
Wellfed said:
LongFuzzy
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2005
- Messages
- 401
A few thoughts
From
http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina27.htm
The Intelligent Chip corrects an obscure but important "materials science" problem inherent in all commercial discs...
But do not state what this 'problem' is, or how the chip fixes it.
From
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/prophead/messages/11100.html
The Intellichip carries a (one or more) quantum dot QD which is activated the the CDP’s laser when spinning a disc. It emits photons at NIR (near infrared) or IR which are forced to behave as wave (not as particles) and which modify the CD’s surface by improving its optical transparency, so that the laser “sees the pits and lands betterâ€. The QD carries a number of “charges†which are used up. The chip recognizes a treated CD so that it won’t be activated and use a charge. When not in use the chip has to remain in its protective housing, made from a non-specified transparent plastic material. A material analysis has shown that the dot (or its support structure) contains Niobium
It sees the pits and lands better. So a one is a better one, and a zero is a better zero?
from
http://www.soundstageav.com/
...restore timing cues
From
http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/idealbb/view.asp?forumID=40&topicID=38967
This is the only product that we can not offer money back guarantee
So, depending on who you beleive, the chip either fixes a material problem, fixes a timing problem, or changes the surface.
Now some facts about CD's.
From
http://www.howstuffworks.com/
You will often read about "pits" on a CD instead of bumps. They appear as pits on the aluminum side, but on the side the laser reads from, they are bumps
data is encoded using EFM (eight-fourteen modulation).
Because the laser may misread a bump, there need to be error-correcting codes to handle single-bit errors. To solve this problem, extra data bits are added that allow the drive to detect single-bit errors and correct them.
Because a scratch or a speck on the CD might cause a whole packet of bytes to be misread (known as a burst error), the drive needs to be able to recover from such an event. This problem is solved by actually interleaving the data on the disc, so that it is stored non-sequentially around one of the disc's circuits
If a few bytes are misread in music, the worst thing that can happen is a little fuzz during playback. When data is stored on a CD, however, any data error is catastrophic. Therefore, additional error correction codes are used when storing data on a CD-ROM
and from
http://electronics.howstuffworks.co...ington.edu/conselec/CE/kuhn/cdaudio2/95x7.htm
The final frame (which started at 6*16*2 = 192 data bits) now contains:
1 sync word 24 bits
1 subcode signal 14 bits
6*2*2*14 data bits 336 bits
8*14 parity bits 112 bits
34*3 merge bits 102 bits
GRAND TOTAL 588 bits
112 parity bits and 192 data bits. About 1 parity for 2 data bits.
So, if the GSIC changes a data bit, its going to have to fix the parity bits along with it. In other words, on the fly in 2 seconds, it can compute the fixes for 700MB of data and the parity bits that go along with it. Pretty impressive.
On the other hand, if it 'improves the optical transparicy' of the disc, then the data is the same, and no change in the sound occurs.
To test the chip, all you need is one disc. First extract the data after it has been corrected. Then apply the GSIC. Extract the data again and compare the two.
To sum it all up:
The proponents have different theories about how the chip works. This should raise some red flags. After reading on how CD are made and encoded, more red flags go up. Oh, and BTW, if it doesn't work for you, no money back. Big red flag. And the final kicker, they also make the 'Magic Rings'.
-LF
From
http://www.machinadynamica.com/machina27.htm
The Intelligent Chip corrects an obscure but important "materials science" problem inherent in all commercial discs...
But do not state what this 'problem' is, or how the chip fixes it.
From
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/prophead/messages/11100.html
The Intellichip carries a (one or more) quantum dot QD which is activated the the CDP’s laser when spinning a disc. It emits photons at NIR (near infrared) or IR which are forced to behave as wave (not as particles) and which modify the CD’s surface by improving its optical transparency, so that the laser “sees the pits and lands betterâ€. The QD carries a number of “charges†which are used up. The chip recognizes a treated CD so that it won’t be activated and use a charge. When not in use the chip has to remain in its protective housing, made from a non-specified transparent plastic material. A material analysis has shown that the dot (or its support structure) contains Niobium
It sees the pits and lands better. So a one is a better one, and a zero is a better zero?
from
http://www.soundstageav.com/
...restore timing cues
From
http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/idealbb/view.asp?forumID=40&topicID=38967
This is the only product that we can not offer money back guarantee
So, depending on who you beleive, the chip either fixes a material problem, fixes a timing problem, or changes the surface.
Now some facts about CD's.
From
http://www.howstuffworks.com/
You will often read about "pits" on a CD instead of bumps. They appear as pits on the aluminum side, but on the side the laser reads from, they are bumps
data is encoded using EFM (eight-fourteen modulation).
Because the laser may misread a bump, there need to be error-correcting codes to handle single-bit errors. To solve this problem, extra data bits are added that allow the drive to detect single-bit errors and correct them.
Because a scratch or a speck on the CD might cause a whole packet of bytes to be misread (known as a burst error), the drive needs to be able to recover from such an event. This problem is solved by actually interleaving the data on the disc, so that it is stored non-sequentially around one of the disc's circuits
If a few bytes are misread in music, the worst thing that can happen is a little fuzz during playback. When data is stored on a CD, however, any data error is catastrophic. Therefore, additional error correction codes are used when storing data on a CD-ROM
and from
http://electronics.howstuffworks.co...ington.edu/conselec/CE/kuhn/cdaudio2/95x7.htm
The final frame (which started at 6*16*2 = 192 data bits) now contains:
1 sync word 24 bits
1 subcode signal 14 bits
6*2*2*14 data bits 336 bits
8*14 parity bits 112 bits
34*3 merge bits 102 bits
GRAND TOTAL 588 bits
112 parity bits and 192 data bits. About 1 parity for 2 data bits.
So, if the GSIC changes a data bit, its going to have to fix the parity bits along with it. In other words, on the fly in 2 seconds, it can compute the fixes for 700MB of data and the parity bits that go along with it. Pretty impressive.
On the other hand, if it 'improves the optical transparicy' of the disc, then the data is the same, and no change in the sound occurs.
To test the chip, all you need is one disc. First extract the data after it has been corrected. Then apply the GSIC. Extract the data again and compare the two.
To sum it all up:
The proponents have different theories about how the chip works. This should raise some red flags. After reading on how CD are made and encoded, more red flags go up. Oh, and BTW, if it doesn't work for you, no money back. Big red flag. And the final kicker, they also make the 'Magic Rings'.
-LF
kittynh said:
Kitty,
I really would appreciate the opportunity to earn the million dollars. I don't see where I was afforded that opportunity in reality. Lip service has been paid to the subject, but I have found no reason to believe that the Challenge is a legitimate enterprise. In fact, my experience with JREF strongly suggests that it is not legitimate. I went into the Challenge believing it to be a true opportunity.
FWIW, I have great faith that the GSIC is producing the effect claimed by its purveyors. I like it. Perhaps my review was overstated in terms most people understand. I believe many audiophiles do understand where I was coming from, I know that many do not.
Auditory perception is a feeble matter. My concerns over accounting for this has created the impression that I also have a feeble mind. Part of my disgust with the process is the Challenge facilitator being only too willing to encourage that impression. My NEW claim is that he practiced deception to facilitate this notion far beyond the truth of the matter. I find this type of behavior incredibly hypocritical, especially in light of his stated objective that the Challenge is to establish truth. I am further vexed that people here don't see through his charade. I'll get over it. Life is good.
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2001
- Messages
- 53,097
Wellfed said:
I don't think people will listen to you if you keep telling lies like this.
gtc said:
It would be nice if JREF would set me up with my own personal FAQ for this type of question.
I think the answer to your last question depends on the source of the stress. My children fighting in another room of the house would momentarily alter my perception. Once the matter was settled I would pick up where I left off unless I were angered to a significant degree. What we are talking about with the Challenge testing is a rigorous enterprise with high stakes. Both monetarily wise and reputation wise, and I am not talking about my own alone. I am quite interested in having my claim tested, I don't want to leave some matters to chance. When I am attuned to my systems output I find the GSIC effect profound, when I am notably distracted I find it more difficult to discern. It really is that simple. I have found the JREF Challenge negotiations to be stressful beyond belief. The Challenge facilitator has been exceedingly belligerent and has not exhibited good faith in the negotiation process. I would go so far as to say that he has practiced chicanery. Behavior not conducive to reaching a protocol agreement. Look at my last protocol proposal and tell me if it is not a fair agreement unamended. I am willing to negotiate amendments and have the utmost respect for JREF's legitimate concerns in protecting theirselves from being defrauded. I have few essential requirements to successfully prove my claim. I know that I have been quite willing to bend on nonessential matters. We seem to make progress and then the facilitator pulls some stunt to derail the negotiations. Too much information I imagine. webfusion, bless his heart, told me I talk too much. I am starting to agree.
Re: Responding to Beleth
In all sincerity I respect Winny as well. The question is; does Winny respect me? Much of this discussion is pretty emotionally charged, I trust you will forgive a faux pas or two.
BTW, do you think anyone here has tried putting themselves in my shoes. I have seen some gracious views expressed. I am curious if many have a real clue as to what it is like to be on this side of a rancorous matter like we have here. It is fairly lonely for one thing.
I would love to have you assist me with the edited email matter. Would you? If so, how can I get you the header information you seek?
Gulliver said:
In all sincerity I respect Winny as well. The question is; does Winny respect me? Much of this discussion is pretty emotionally charged, I trust you will forgive a faux pas or two.
BTW, do you think anyone here has tried putting themselves in my shoes. I have seen some gracious views expressed. I am curious if many have a real clue as to what it is like to be on this side of a rancorous matter like we have here. It is fairly lonely for one thing.
I would love to have you assist me with the edited email matter. Would you? If so, how can I get you the header information you seek?
alfaniner
Penultimate Amazing
prewitt81 said:
This is the funniest damn thing I've read on this entire thread.
Kudos, sir!!
(revisited) I posted this even before reading jmercer's post on the next page.
and I thought I was the big joker here!
Kudos I say!!!
(Please note that I started in this thread in all earnestness for the poster. And what was my first post?
Dated 03-15-2005
alfaniner said:
It is only when an applicant passes a certain undefinable BS fence that I refrain from taking them seriously from then on.)
alfaniner
Penultimate Amazing
LostAngeles said:
Heard good things about this one. Is it available in the US? I've googled for it and not found a lot. I'm a big fan of certain PS2 games (see my posts here)
Katamari Damacy discussion
(BTW, I am dangerously close to posting my own recipes here, something I've never done before...)
webfusion
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2004
- Messages
- 9,774
recipe time
And immediately thereafter, he put me on "ignore" and continued to blather on, placing himself into a downward spiral of his own making.
And what is the reason for now continuing to blather?
I have no idea.
Maybe ask Paul Carey.
==================================
MMMMMMmmmm, tasty:
(especially for alfaniner)
Maryland CrabCakes
Back fin and go easy on the Tabasco
(except KRAMER, who I know will dash liberally with the hot sauce, to his discerning taste)
And immediately thereafter, he put me on "ignore" and continued to blather on, placing himself into a downward spiral of his own making.
And what is the reason for now continuing to blather?
I have no idea.
Maybe ask Paul Carey.
==================================
MMMMMMmmmm, tasty:
(especially for alfaniner)
Maryland CrabCakes
Back fin and go easy on the Tabasco
(except KRAMER, who I know will dash liberally with the hot sauce, to his discerning taste)
OK, I have laid it on pretty thick by now. You all get the idea of how I perceive the JREF Challenge.
Darat, I will get you the information I promised no later than Sunday evening. I don't expect it to be complete as Kitty has demanded. It is a pretty daunting task.
I will interleave all of my correspondence with Kramer at some point in May and leave it for you all to analyze if you still have any interest. I admit that it is all pretty boring. I can document that is true.
I won't monitor the discussion for too much longer. FWIW, I will leave my email active.
I am quite sorry that matters came to this. I would love for JREF to reopen my file and allow me to be tested under acceptable conditions. I don't believe my requirements are as difficult to overcome as many perceive.
I notice that I have become a Critical Thinker with 252 posts. There must be some significance there.
Darat, I will get you the information I promised no later than Sunday evening. I don't expect it to be complete as Kitty has demanded. It is a pretty daunting task.
I will interleave all of my correspondence with Kramer at some point in May and leave it for you all to analyze if you still have any interest. I admit that it is all pretty boring. I can document that is true.
I won't monitor the discussion for too much longer. FWIW, I will leave my email active.
I am quite sorry that matters came to this. I would love for JREF to reopen my file and allow me to be tested under acceptable conditions. I don't believe my requirements are as difficult to overcome as many perceive.
I notice that I have become a Critical Thinker with 252 posts. There must be some significance there.