• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

StopSylvia.com email: "sylvia browne"

The emailer seemed to have alot of valid points imo.

Your replies were smug and didn't address anything. I'll chalk that up as a loss for you.
 
RSLancastr said:
Thanks, rj.

I wasn't sure why the ip address showed up in my browser rather than the domain name, and so decided to leave it as it was.

Refresh my not-so-good memory of such things: why is it a "better link" with the domain name rather than the IP? Offhand, it seems to me that specifying the IP would be more reliable, as it would not rely on a DNS to correctly translate it to the IP.

It has been a while since I've thought about such things, sorry.

ETA: The domain name is definitely preferable where human memory is involved (which is why domain names were invented in the first place, I believe), but I do not recall why they would be better within a link, where the domain name is (sorta) hidden from the user. And it is also better when the IP address may change, especially over time, so using the domain name is the best option from a "future historical" standpoint. Was that your thought?
Click to expand...

The reason I said it was better is because after clicking your link I was not logged on. But after clicking my link I was.
 
mushy said:
The emailer seemed to have alot of valid points imo.

Your replies were smug and didn't address anything. I'll chalk that up as a loss for you.
Click to expand...

If someone whose opinion mattered at all to me said that, or someone who had shown even an ounce of reason, I might be concerned.

But since it is you mushy, I will lose no sleep over it.
 
RSLancastr said:
True CS, but then the IP is almost certainly lost as well, so a link using the IP would fail then too.
Click to expand...

Because domain names can move across IP addresses :) - to give an example, one of the sites I run has, at the minute, multiple IPs (v4 - we have even more IPv6).

Also, to give a more "normal" example - if you migrate servers, you change your IP address. Point DNS at your new IP, everyone can still connect by domain name.

Also: I find it interesting that your recent incoming emails all seem to be written in a similar style.
 
CyberCecil said:
Mr. Lancaster you never cease to amaze me with your polite replies to people who are so hostile toward you. I could not manage such civility, especially when dealing with a person as vile as Sylvia Browne.
Click to expand...
I think it gives Mr. Lancaster the upper hand to not sink to the level of the hate letters.
 
mushy said:
The emailer seemed to have alot of valid points imo.

Your replies were smug and didn't address anything. I'll chalk that up as a loss for you.
Click to expand...

mushy, did you read the same post as I did? I saw a text that addressed every point (indicated by << >> to make them stand out), with a polite but firm argument, that was not aimed at the person but at the points.
What exactly did you see?


Not that I think Robert needs defending, but I find your singlemindedness a bit tiring. If I were you, I'd familiarise myself with the thread tools, to the upper right. There is a nifty feature: Ignore this thread. I do this with Bigfoot threads as soon as they pop up, so I remain blissfully unaware of the amount of traffic and posts those receive.

Femke
 
RSLancastr said:
If someone whose opinion mattered at all to me said that, or someone who had shown even an ounce of reason, I might be concerned.

But since it is you mushy, I will lose no sleep over it.
Click to expand...

So people who are critical of you opinions don't matter to you? lol and you claim you arnt a narcissist
 
mushy said:
So people who are critical of you opinions don't matter to you? lol and you claim you arnt a narcissist
Click to expand...

No. It's just that you specifically do not matter to him. Don't extrapolate from the treatment you receive.
 
mushy said:
The emailer seemed to have alot of valid points imo.

Your replies were smug and didn't address anything. I'll chalk that up as a loss for you.
Click to expand...

I assume it's difficult to have a response different to what one hoped.
 
mushy said:
So people who are critical of you opinions don't matter to you? lol and you claim you arnt a narcissist
Click to expand...

Again you show your almost total lack of rational thought.

The fact that your opinion does not matter to me, and that you are also critical of me does NOT mean, as you are stating/implying here, that I don't care about the opinion of all people who are critical of me. Your implying that it does is yet another example of your creating strawmen, which seem to be the only positions you can refute.

mushy, my opinion of you has very little to do with your criticism of me, and almost everything to do with your never using so much as an ounce of skeptical or critical thought (while claiming to be a "True Skeptic").

Another of your strawmen: saying that I claim to not be a narcissist. Please point to even a single post I've made or article I've written where I state or claim that.

Oh, you can't?

Learn this, mush: simply saying that somebody has said something does NOT mean that they have said it. And I think that most people reading your blog would notice that you keep ascribing statements to me without providing quotes of, nor even links to places where I have said any such things.

The fact that I DO provide quotes, links, and, when I can, video/audio recordings of statements by Sylvia (and Kaz) are a large part of what makes my Stop sites powerful.

The fact that your Stop Site provides no such evidence, and are full merely of your particular opinions (if not lies) about things I have said, is what makes it merely sad and pathetic.
 
Femke said:
mushy, did you read the same post as I did? I saw a text that addressed every point (indicated by << >> to make them stand out), with a polite but firm argument, that was not aimed at the person but at the points.
Click to expand...

Thank FSM you saw that, I thought perhaps I had only imagined it.
 
what makes my Stop sites powerful.
Click to expand...

Lol your stop sites arnt powerful. Any site that looks like it was designed using an spectrum in the 1970's can't be taken seriously.
 
mushy said:
Lol your stop sites arnt powerful. Any site that looks like it was designed using an spectrum in the 1970's can't be taken seriously.
Click to expand...

Most people are able to judge by content, not just by appearances.
 
Moss said:
Most people are able to judge by content, not just by appearances.
Click to expand...


Most people on here claim if your spelling is bad, then your arguments arnt taken as seriously. They should also then admit, if a site looks horrible, then its content shouldn't be taken as seriously.

Unless of course, they are in denial and using the famous JREF double standards.
 
mushy said:
Most people on here claim if your spelling is bad, then your arguments arnt taken as seriously. They should also then admit, if a site looks horrible, then its content shouldn't be taken as seriously.

Unless of course, they are in denial and using the famous JREF double standards.
Click to expand...

If you dislike this forum so much, you might consider ignoring it. We seem to cause a great deal of aggravation with you, yet you persist in posting. For your own benefit, you should consider the option of going away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom