StopSylvia email: "Hummmmmm"

[tuoni]

Well, if you were to vist a site asking you for your credit card info, and it looked like it had been designed by a child with web 1.0 graphics, would you enter your info? Looks are relevent when making a decision.

I'm struggling to see the link between handing over credit card information and StopSylvia.

Oh, that didn't sound like a real question, it came across as a smug rhetorical one. Thats why i didn't answer.

Ah, OK. Well, care to answer it now that you've got that off your chest?

 

[RSLancastr]

RSL,
I wanna be you when I grow up!

You approach this whole thing with such class and honesty, which I find to be an incredibly difficult thing to do when pointing out lies and delusions.

Thanks, CM - you're very kind. I have yet to decide what *I* want to grow up to be.

Every time I find out a friend has fallen under the spell of some nonsense, religion, anti-medicine, whatever- I find myself a bit paralyzed by the fact that mine is an inherently negative position, anything I say is inherently an attack on them because to criticize their belief implies that they have been fools and the people they respect are either crazy or dishonest.

It is definitely a fine line to walk.

I am absolutely inspired by the way you approach this with tact, but no apology.

Sorry for the brown nosing. Just a fan of your work.

As long as it's not BrownE-nosing.

Thanks again!

 

[ria_rokz]

Well, if you were to vist a site asking you for your credit card info, and it looked like it had been designed by a child with web 1.0 graphics, would you enter your info? Looks are relevent when making a decision.

It is not asking for my credit card info. It is merely supplying information. If you've given your credit card number to the site, you must be on the wrong one, so maybe watch out for that.

But seriously, if the website was some sort of fancy-schmancy super high tech site would it matter to you? REALLY?

I actually like the site because it is plain and simple. This makes it easier to read as it isn't full of fluff. I pay more attention to the style, tone, and quality of writing. RSL also is very transparent about who he is and makes himself available for questions or to be found on this forum (easy enough through a simple Google search). That's what matters to me.

 

[sadhatter]

for example if someone who disliked RL started up a site called robertLancasterIsAPaedophile.com

and it had a picture of him saying

"Is he a well-intentioned fraud debunker, with a harmless bone in his body? Is he a paedophile, Getting kicks by molesting children? Or is she something else entirely?"

Then i was to email in saying he molested me as a child (a made up story).

Is the creater of the site ok to say ... "I just recieved another email that sounds honest" and publish the email?

I mean according to the people on here it should be fine to do that. I mean there is so much nice stuff written about rob, that its only fair to let people hear the other side... right?

The thing is if it was false, he could take legal action against the person saying it. Just like sylvia could do if what was being said was false, statements that can be proven false and can be shown to impact one's reputation are slander.

The problem is sylvia knows she cannot prove her powers, thereby making the claims against her, not applicable for slander. The day sylvia can refute these claims, i have no doubt she will have a team of lawyers harass Rob. But i also have no doubt that day will come because of the simple fact that she is not a psychic.

 

[headscratcher4]

I wish I could understand what Mushy is after here. His claim that he thinks Sylvia is a fraud rings increasingly false. It suggests a position taken so that he/she might be taken seriously in this forum. However, the incoherence of his argument with RSL suggests that his real argument is not about balance but in opposition to any perceived attack on Sylvia -- and that means any negative information of any kind.

He completely fails to address the reality that Robert has confronted from the very beginning: the deck is pretty well stacked --unblanced -- against Sylvia skeptics. There is very little information -- as Robert has provided -- detailing her many manifest failures whereas there are many claiming and proclaiming her reality. But somehow to our squishy friend, Robert is the one promoting imbalance and negativity, but the proponents of this scam artist fail to elicit any simmilar rebuke.

 

[sadhatter]

When Sylvia gets a negative e-mail, does she put it up on her website?

Seeing as the number of sites that are pro sylvia, ( not even to mention with no supporting evidence.) are numerous compared to roberts, and that sylvia does not post negative e-mails herself. It seems Mushy is holding Robert up to a double standard. It is fine for sylvia to post nothing but " Pro Sylvia" stuff, and it is fine for fans of hers to post nothing but pro sylvia stuff, but when posting information against her, one must provide every " I love sylvia" e-mail they receive along with it.

 

[RSLancastr]

Prove that the email he posted from people accusing her of ripping them off are "accurate information" please.

If you notice, each of those articles says something like "I received the following email:"

That is a verifiable fact, provable in a court of law. I then usually state that the email is simply the opinion of its author. I assume the reader has the intelligence to understand from this that it is up to them - again, like a jury - to decide how reliable the "witness" is.

but yet again you are all ignorant to the point. Just because someone is a fraud ITS NOTS ok to publish any random email to a wide audience like he does. Why dont you understand that?

As I have stated more than once here Mushy, I don't "publish any random email." I have received literally HUNDREDS of emails on the site, more than 99% of which are anti-Browne. I have only published a tiny fraction of these. I have published accounts from one third of the (three) people who have sent me emails satisfied with a reading from Browne.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

I wish I could understand what Mushy is after here. His claim that he thinks Sylvia is a fraud rings increasingly false. It suggests a position taken so that he/she might be taken seriously in this forum. However, the incoherence of his argument with RSL suggests that his real argument is not about balance but in opposition to any perceived attack on Sylvia -- and that means any negative information of any kind.

I'm not sure that it's particularly productive to speculate on mushy's motives for posting. He has said that he's going to post evidence to back up his claims. That should tell us all we need to know.

 

[mushy]

I wish I could understand what Mushy is after here. His claim that he thinks Sylvia is a fraud rings increasingly false. It suggests a position taken so that he/she might be taken seriously in this forum. However, the incoherence of his argument with RSL suggests that his real argument is not about balance but in opposition to any perceived attack on Sylvia -- and that means any negative information of any kind.

He completely fails to address the reality that Robert has confronted from the very beginning: the deck is pretty well stacked --unblanced -- against Sylvia skeptics. There is very little information -- as Robert has provided -- detailing her many manifest failures whereas there are many claiming and proclaiming her reality. But somehow to our squishy friend, Robert is the one promoting imbalance and negativity, but the proponents of this scam artist fail to elicit any simmilar rebuke.

Oh you got me! Its true, im actually an evil underling of Sylvia Browne, sent fourth to do her bidding and discredit the pesky Robert Lancaster. I'll return now, to queen Sylvia and tell her that yet another dastardly plan has been foiled by those clever folk over at JREF!!! Damn you all!!!!!

 

[Belz...]

I don't believe she can do those things either, but you again are missing my point. If anonymous emails are enough to publish as further evidence she is a fraud, then post the numerous written articles as proof that she is psychic. Either that or admit your site is a hate site.

No, that's not how it works. Burden of proof is on her, and merely claiming success isn't good enough.

Claiming failure, however, needs no further qualification, which is why it's easy to debunk her claims.

 

[headscratcher4]

I'm not sure that it's particularly productive to speculate on mushy's motives for posting. He has said that he's going to post evidence to back up his claims. That should tell us all we need to know.

A fair point.

 

[aggle-rithm]

Oh you got me! Its true, im actually an evil underling of Sylvia Browne, sent fourth to do her bidding and discredit the pesky Robert Lancaster. I'll return now, to queen Sylvia and tell her that yet another dastardly plan has been foiled by those clever folk over at JREF!!! Damn you all!!!!!

Yeah, that's pretty much what her lawyer said a few years ago.

 

[aggle-rithm]

Yes, i have. Awful color scheme and awful layout. You can tell he has no real knowledge of html or any php/css/mysql/javascript/jquery

I am very, very curious.

Exactly what is wrong with Robert's grasp of html, php, mysql, javascript, or jquery?

 

[RSLancastr]

Yes, i have. Awful color scheme and awful layout. You can tell he has no real knowledge of html or any php/css/mysql/javascript/jquery

I have a fair amount of straight html experience. SSB was my first shot at CSS, so I will cop to having nearly "no knowledge of it." the site, IIRC, uses no mysql, javascript and jquery (it is not database-driven), so I don;t see how my having "no real knowledge" of them is a problem. I had hoped to make the site database-driven, and implement some php/mySQL aspects (such as the list of articles), but my stroke put all of that on a waaay back burner.


You are not the first to complain about the color scheme. I happen to like it, but...oh well.

I strongly disagree about the layout. When I created the site, one of my primary goals was to make it easy to navigate. I think I acheived that. And I've received many compliments on that.

Another primary goal was simplicity in design. I didn't want to have to worry about what browser the viewer was using, or whether they needed some external application installed in order to view some part of the site.

And, to me, the main point about the site is the information. The articles. Adding any snazzy graphics, animation, etc to the site was absolutely the LEAST important thing in terms of site design.

 

[ria_rokz]

I have a fair amount of straight html experience. SSB was my first shot at CSS, so I will cop to having nearly "no knowledge of it." the site, IIRC, uses no mysql, javascript and jquery (it is not database-driven), so I don;t see how my having "no real knowledge" of them is a problem. I had hoped to make the site database-driven, and implement some php/mySQL aspects (such as the list of articles), but my stroke put all of that on a waaay back burner.


You are not the first to complain about the color scheme. I happen to like it, but...oh well.

I strongly disagree about the layout. When I created the site, one of my primary goals was to make it easy to navigate. I think I acheived that. And I've received many compliments on that.

Another primary goal was simplicity in design. I didn't want to have to worry about what browser the viewer was using, or whether they needed some external application installed in order to view some part of the site.

And, to me, the main point about the site is the information. The articles. Adding any snazzy graphics, animation, etc to the site was absolutely the LEAST important thing in terms of site design.

YES.

 

[aggle-rithm]

I'm not sure that it's particularly productive to speculate on mushy's motives for posting. He has said that he's going to post evidence to back up his claims. That should tell us all we need to know.

Still...I'd like to know where his hostility comes from. Attacking RSL as he does here is like rushing into the mall at Christmas time and beating the living crap out of Santa Claus.

 

[mushy]

the site, IIRC, uses no mysql, javascript and jquery

<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"><!--
//<!--
document.write(String.fromCharCode(60,97,32,104,114,101,102,61,34,109,97,105,108,116,111,58,119,101,98,109,97,115,116,101,114,64,83,116,111,112,83,121,108,118,105,97,46,99,111,109,34,62,82,111,98,101,114,116,32,83,46,32,76,97,110,99,97,115,116,101,114,60,47,97,62));
//-->
// -->
// -->
// -->
// --></script>

Another lie?

Problems - Indentation, Colour scheme, error messages "[an error occurred while processing this directive] " and css in html page, and table layout is slow loading and obnoxious.

I do like some of the fonts though.

 

[AdMan]

And, to me, the main point about the site is the information. The articles. Adding any snazzy graphics, animation, etc to the site was absolutely the LEAST important thing in terms of site design.

Absolutely agree.

Let's hope Mushy stops moving the goalposts and presents his evidence.

 

[aggle-rithm]

<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"><!--
//<!--
document.write(String.fromCharCode(60,97,32,104,114,101,102,61,34,109,97,105,108,116,111,58,119,101,98,109,97,115,116,101,114,64,83,116,111,112,83,121,108,118,105,97,46,99,111,109,34,62,82,111,98,101,114,116,32,83,46,32,76,97,110,99,97,115,116,101,114,60,47,97,62));
//-->
// -->
// -->
// -->
// --></script>

Another lie?

Problems - Indentation, Colour scheme, error messages "[an error occurred while processing this directive] " and css in html page, and table layout is slow loading and obnoxious.

I do like some of the fonts though.

IIRC means "if I remember correctly".

This javascript isn't even worth mentioning. It looks like something autogenerated by the host.

ETA: It prints out a link to Robert's mailto address.

 

[sadhatter]

<script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"><!--
//<!--
document.write(String.fromCharCode(60,97,32,104,114,101,102,61,34,109,97,105,108,116,111,58,119,101,98,109,97,115,116,101,114,64,83,116,111,112,83,121,108,118,105,97,46,99,111,109,34,62,82,111,98,101,114,116,32,83,46,32,76,97,110,99,97,115,116,101,114,60,47,97,62));
//-->
// -->
// -->
// -->
// --></script>

Another lie?

Problems - Indentation, Colour scheme, error messages "[an error occurred while processing this directive] " and css in html page, and table layout is slow loading and obnoxious.

I do like some of the fonts though.

This is like trying to say an MMA fighter is crap because his shorts are purple black and light blue. ( if anyone gets the reference i will fall over dead.) Your really scraping the bowl here for insults Mush.