The TruthSeeker1234 $1000.00 Challenge

[Pardalis]

Most of the 9/11 CTs I've encountered, online or in person, are not honorable people. Whether we like the idea or not, several people accepted T1234's original terms. I want to see if he has any sense of honor, or if he's just another lying creep.

bolding mine

I think you have answered your own question Gravy. Truthseeker isn't worth it.

 

[Dave1001]

Wrong. Stellafane agreed to your original terms. Will you honor them? Yes or no?

It's not a fair contract. I think there are more honorable ways to challenge him than to hold him to this particular offer.

 

[Stellafane]

I think Stellafane backed out, the ball is in Tightrope's court. Gravy, if you want the job, I'll give it to you. You seem eager to actually get to the facts of the matter.

Backed out? How do you figure that? I accepted your original proposal, so long as we cleared up some of your subjective verbiage, as I explained in an earlier posting.

You appear to be the one changing the rules all over the place, muddying the waters with some sort of book/article idea based on private email exchanges. I'm beginning to smell another one of your hoaxes here, and at this stage I'm wondering if I'm being an idiot for ever getting involved in this.

And to answer your earlier direct question, Gravy: Yes, I accepted the debate challenge, as originally articlulated by TS, so long as the concerns I mentioned in my previous posting are addressed.

 

[Gravy]

It's not a fair contract. I think there are more honorable ways to challenge him than to hold him to this particular offer.

Dave, no one here challenged him. He offered $1000 to anyone willing to debate according to his original terms. Several people accepted.

What's not fair?

 

[Stellafane]

It's not a fair contract. I think there are more honorable ways to challenge him than to hold him to this particular offer.

And what, pray tell, would be a more "fair" and "honorable" way to treat someone who's already admitted he's a hoaxer?

This is getting really stupid...

 

[Gravy]

And to answer your earlier direct question, Gravy: Yes, I accepted the debate challenge, as originally articlulated by TS, so long as the concerns I mentioned in my previous posting are addressed.

Sounds reasonable.

TruthSeeker1234, yes or no?

 

[Pardalis]

What are you expecting from Truthseeker? He has shown to be a dispicable liar. Do you really expect him to stick to his words and have a fair debate? Even if there were a one-on-on debate, do you really expect him to accept defeat when it will come? (and it will)

 

[Dave1001]

Dave, no one here challenged him. He offered $1000 to anyone willing to debate according to his original terms. Several people accepted.

What's not fair?

It's exploitive. Clearly his offer isn't fair or reasonable to himself. Thus I think it's bad etiquette to accept it, and even worse to try to hold him to it or to suggest he should honor it.

 

[uruk]

TS is trying to find a face saving out so that he can claim that he offered a thousand dollars to debate someone here and that we refused.

Just like a true CT'er he'll convieniantly forget to mention how many people were accepting his challenge and how he shifts goalposts and points of agreement after acceptance.

 

[Triterope]

It's exploitive. Clearly his offer isn't fair or reasonable to himself. Thus I think it's bad etiquette to accept it, and even worse to try to hold him to it or to suggest he should honor it.

I'm a technical writer. I get paid to do research and write documents all the time. If TS1234 wants to pay for professional writing services, he is free to do so. If I was a bricklayer and he was offering people $1000 to lay bricks, I'd want to accept that offer too.

What TS1234 really wants here is a ghostwriter. He wants to pay someone to research and write up the "official" side of the story, so he can write a rebuttal to it and publish the whole thing. It's a little fanciful, but I've heard of worse writing projects.

Come to think of it: if he's serious about this, he could co-author and self-publish an entire book on the matter. The subject matter and the debate framework is easily enough to fill a couple hundred pages. I'm sure it wouldn't be the worst 9/11 book out there. (For that matter, are there any 9/11 books that purport to debate the subject?) This approach would also fulfill TS1234's desire to give this project prominence, and it would free us from any pesky implications of using JREF Forums for hosting purposes.

So TS, what would you say to elevating this project to print media level? We'd have to hammer out some new contract details. But in general, I would be willing to research and write the "official" argument for a flat fee, and grant you rights to republish it. We'd have to work out the details of paying for the self-publishing, but that should be minor. I think the idea of a debate between the official story and the inside-job theory could make a compelling narrative.

Just throwin' it out there...

 

[Dave1001]

I'm a technical writer. I get paid to do research and write documents all the time. If TS1234 wants to pay for professional writing services, he is free to do so. If I was a bricklayer and he was offering people $1000 to lay bricks, I'd want to accept that offer too.

What TS1234 really wants here is a ghostwriter. He wants to pay someone to research and write up the "official" side of the story, so he can write a rebuttal to it and publish the whole thing. It's a little fanciful, but I've heard of worse writing projects.

Come to think of it: if he's serious about this, he could co-author and self-publish an entire book on the matter. The subject matter and the debate framework is easily enough to fill a couple hundred pages. I'm sure it wouldn't be the worst 9/11 book out there. (For that matter, are there any 9/11 books that purport to debate the subject?) This approach would also fulfill TS1234's desire to give this project prominence, and it would free us from any pesky implications of using JREF Forums for hosting purposes.

So TS, what would you say to elevating this project to print media level? We'd have to hammer out some new contract details. But in general, I would be willing to research and write the "official" argument for a flat fee, and grant you rights to republish it. We'd have to work out the details of paying for the self-publishing, but that should be minor. I think the idea of a debate between the official story and the inside-job theory could make a compelling narrative.

Just throwin' it out there...

Now that would be fair. He sells 200 copies for $5 over cost each, and he's broken even.

 

[Gravy]

It's exploitive. Clearly his offer isn't fair or reasonable to himself. Thus I think it's bad etiquette to accept it, and even worse to try to hold him to it or to suggest he should honor it.

Are you his legal guardian? This guy offered to pay people to debate, and taunted us to accept his challenge. He continues to taunt. For all I know, he's Bill Gates.

Dave, keep in mind that this guy is never going to part with a penny. That's my point in pushing this: to show that we're not dealing with an honest and honorable person, and to make these CTs deal with reality. The more they say stupid things, the more their words will come back to haunt them.

 

[TruthSeeker1234]

Tightrope is getting it!

'm a technical writer. I get paid to do research and write documents all the time. If TS1234 wants to pay for professional writing services, he is free to do so. If I was a bricklayer and he was offering people $1000 to lay bricks, I'd want to accept that offer too.

What TS1234 really wants here is a ghostwriter. He wants to pay someone to research and write up the "official" side of the story, so he can write a rebuttal to it and publish the whole thing. It's a little fanciful, but I've heard of worse writing projects.

Come to think of it: if he's serious about this, he could co-author and self-publish an entire book on the matter. The subject matter and the debate framework is easily enough to fill a couple hundred pages. I'm sure it wouldn't be the worst 9/11 book out there. (For that matter, are there any 9/11 books that purport to debate the subject?) This approach would also fulfill TS1234's desire to give this project prominence, and it would free us from any pesky implications of using JREF Forums for hosting purposes.

So TS, what would you say to elevating this project to print media level? We'd have to hammer out some new contract details. But in general, I would be willing to research and write the "official" argument for a flat fee, and grant you rights to republish it. We'd have to work out the details of paying for the self-publishing, but that should be minor. I think the idea of a debate between the official story and the inside-job theory could make a compelling narrative.

Just throwin' it out there...

Yes, a compelling narative, my thoughts exactly.

 

[Gravy]

Tightrope is getting it!

Sounds reasonable.

TruthSeeker1234, yes or no?

Are you going to honor your original terms and debate with Stellafane?

Yes or no?

 

[Triterope]

Now that would be fair. He sells 200 copies for $5 over cost each, and he's broken even.

Which is what I think he has in mind. He can schlep them at 9/11 functions, or other such events. If he really is a member of some "truth" organization, a published book (even self-published) would be a feather in his cap.

EDITED TO ADD: TS1234, I sent you a PM.

 

[Loss Leader]

Which is what I think he has in mind. He can schlep them at 9/11 functions, or other such events. If he really is a member of some "truth" organization, a published book (even self-published) would be a feather in his cap.

His problem is that if he holds the debate here, he'd have a non-exclusive right to the material. If he were to try to publish, anyone could just flood the market with the debate and drown him out.

But none of that is going to happen. I've read TS1234's work on this board and there is absolutely nothing about it that leads me to believe he has the ability to author even his side of the argument. Even self-publishing would be a disaster. Nobody is going to read anything this guy writes.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Triterope - (TS... it's Triterope, not Tightrope, dude... the guy's a writer, so he chose his name with some thought, no doubt)....

Triterope - would you agree to do the manual for say Symantec if you were going to be held up to your peers on the quality of your work and you found that the person who hired you was from their competition, and wanted a bad manual.

Any sort of book on the "official 9/11 CT according to JREF", in which you give over editorial control to TS1234? I think we'd be as foolish as he thinks we are if we gave this even an informal sanction.

Not to mention - we can't get the guy to agree to debate according to his original terms, and you're going to sit and wrangle with him over positioning of "this" versus "that" in a book? The discussions would go on into the next decade!

 

[Architect]

Nobody is going to read anything this guy writes.

Except we all read the drivcel he posts.......

 

[Horatius]

It's not a fair contract. I think there are more honorable ways to challenge him than to hold him to this particular offer.

Yes, but in these degenerate days, recourse to the Field of Honour is frowned upon.

 

[Triterope]

Would you agree to do the manual for say Symantec if you were going to be held up to your peers on the quality of your work and you found that the person who hired you was from their competition, and wanted a bad manual.

Any sort of book on the "official 9/11 CT according to JREF", in which you give over editorial control to TS1234? I think we'd be as foolish as he thinks we are if we gave this even an informal sanction.

Not to mention - we can't get the guy to agree to debate according to his original terms, and you're going to sit and wrangle with him over positioning of "this" versus "that" in a book? The discussions would go on into the next decade!

I've considered all this, and I think I can do this project in a way that will avoid these problems. Just for the record, I will only do this if I can argue the official position as forcefully as I wish. I refuse to lob up softballs or otherwise weaken the facts of 9/11 so the conspiracy can "win" the argument.

I'm going to discuss the matter privately with TS. We'll see if it goes anywhere.