DR Costella's leaning lamppost

[John Butler]

Mitcham,

You can’t correct mistakes that are not mistakes.  Your use of altered media didn’t work.  

I am not mentally deficient or retarded.  Your insults will be reported.

[John Butler]

Mitcham,

Do you and  others realize your taunts and insults make me a sympathetic figure?  Do you realize your behavior makes my work more credible to people when you can not reply in a fact based manner.  And, have to resort to the behavior you exhibit.  In other words your replies are counter productive and harmful to your arguments.  Your replies are not based on reasonable argument but unreasonable despite in your desire to refute every thing I say.

Edited June 14, 2019 by John Butler

[Michael Clark]

8 minutes ago, John Butler said:

Mitcham,

Do you and  others realize your taunts and insults make me a sympathetic figure?  Do you realize your behavior makes my work more credible to people when you can not reply in a fact based manner.  And, have to resort to the behavior you exhibit.  In other words your replies are counter productive and harmful to your arguments.  Your replies are not based on reasonable argument but unreasonable despite in your desire to refute every thing I say.

John, What I think you are missing, “taunts and insults” aside, is that your observations and arguments, by and large (wholly?) are without merit; they are completely wrong. Acknowledging your posts and giving them there due critical attention, which amounts to none, is very important. I, for one, would not want a lurker or passer-by to think that your contributions are a reflection of the kind of work that is desired or respected here. Your contributions, in my opinion, have driven-off or shut down many worthy contributors because they can’t bear to see their work stand in proximity to yours.

In this JFKA thing of ours we always have to ask, née assume, at least as a hypothesis, if the the ends are an intended consequence and outcome of the means. So, what are we to assume about the consequent alienation of respected contributors and rational debates as a response to your offerings?

[John Butler]

Clark,

We can't put the "taunts and insults" aside.  You are welcome to your opinions.  I do not agree.  These "worthy contributors" are neither respectful or worthy when they try to shut down debate based on personal attacks and insults.  Remember back when this used to be your game also.  You were the worst attacker when I first came to the forum.  You have since cleaned up your posts.  I appreciate that, but totally reject your opinions.

[Ray Mitcham]

1 hour ago, John Butler said:

Mitcham,

Do you and  others realize your taunts and insults make me a sympathetic figure?  Do you realize your behavior makes my work more credible to people when you can not reply in a fact based manner.  And, have to resort to the behavior you exhibit.  In other words your replies are counter productive and harmful to your arguments.  Your replies are not based on reasonable argument but unreasonable despite in your desire to refute every thing I say.

Not taunts and insults. Just pointing out how wrong you are in your posts. And neither my or anyone else's behaviour could ever make your work more credible. Because you are usually totally wrong.

Remember the shadows of the posts?  You won't even try the experiment i suggested as it will prove how wrong you are.

(Stand by for Butler, "I'm not taking orders from Mitcham.... as it would prove him right.")

Edited June 14, 2019 by Ray Mitcham

[John Butler]

What's a "Dougal"?

[Ray Mitcham]

Just now, John Butler said:

What's a "Dougal"?

What happened when you tried the post shadow experiment?

[John Butler]

Why show a video with what appeared to be a mentally handicapped person?  It didn't relate to anything but a personal attack.

Again, what's a "Dougal"?

[John Butler]

I think the moderators should close this thread.  Instead of being a research based thread it has become one of personal attack, insults, and spurious research to refute what I have stated.

This thread needs to be closed.

[James R Gordon]

Let me be perfectly clear here. The reference to "Dougal" is ambiguous. Whether it is a reference to "Dougal" the dog from the "Magic Roundabout" or just a general term of disparagement is not clear.

What is clear is that my patience with this is over. This would normally be the topic of a private PM. I have already intervened in public in this thread - something I thought would have been sufficient in itself - but apparently not so.

I have no doubt that this is a topic where members views are strongly held. And indeed I can understand that the use of such terms of disparagement are an indication of such strongly held feelings.

HOWEVER

The next report I get - and where I agree with the content of the report - I will remove the posting privileges of the one causing the report.

And No I am not closing this thread. Members will behave if they wish to continue to post.

I acknowledge that other JFK web sites are more lax on adjectival references - but not this site. We may not be the largest or the most popular JFK site but we are the Education Forum.

James.