Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Mr. Smart vs. Truth & Free Speech (BC3K), Part 3

71 views
Skip to first unread message

bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com

unread,
May 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/15/98
to

Part 3 in Derek's attempt to squelch the truth and free speech
covers Eric's response to my open letter and also is really as far
as negotiations ever really got. IMHO, the last bit of progress was
Eric's suggestion to use the AOL attorney. From that point on (at
least from my perspective) all the other party tried to do was
stall/trick/scare. (I believe Eric's statement would be that, he was
waiting for some certification from the registrar at Derek's school
for the rest of the time, until, Derek reneged on the agreement to
use a third party to validate the PhD. This explanation seems to
ignore the fact that there were a number of open issues that he
never bothered trying to clean up, prior to Derek reneging.)

This part also covers the period where the on-line euphoria over
BaZ's departure was running out of control. Then, I see a post(s)
(dated between 3/21 and 3/24/98) where Derek says that I'm not
cooperating and everything I said was a smoke screen in my March 20
open letter and that I was going to be taught an expensive lesson
or something like that. I decided to try and find out what was
really going on from Mr. Rotbard, because, I felt, I was
cooperating fully. I thought maybe Derek was just upset that I
didn't just roll over immediately. The emails 3/24-25/98 was an
attempt to find out which it was, were they trying to negotiate in
good faith or were they just planning on trying to scare me into
capitulation.
March 20 - 25, 1998

note: At a certain point (about 3/19/98) I was thinking that maybe
somehow Derek really might have a bona fide PhD. If so then, I
wanted to find out as quickly as possible and get the web site taken
down and post my prepared apology. I also remember thinking that if
he did have a PhD, he was a dummy for letting it go on for so long. :-)
Derek and company's on-line gloating contrary to the promise to BaZ,
made a convincing argument to me, that Derek was just up to his old
tricks of lie and deceit, though.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 23:29:29 -0500
From: Eric Rotbard <rot...@ix.netcom.com>
To: Bill Huffman <huf...@sparc.sandiegoca.ncr.com>
Subject: Re: Huffman's Open Letter to Eric Rotbard

<Eric's response was very professional and well done, IMO.
He suggested that a lawyer be used as the third party.>

Eric Rotbard

------------------------------------------------------------------

From huffman Mon Mar 23 15:49:47 1998
Subject: Re: Huffman's Open Letter to Eric Rotbard
To: rot...@ix.netcom.com
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 15:49:47 -0800 (PST)

<I snipped stuff to protect the privacy of the other party.>

As for "damages will be inferred", this, of course, only becomes
relevent should liability be found. In the book I got on the Supreme
Court (copyright 1992) it said something to the effect that
Gertz v. Robert Welch has set up a blockade for proving liablility
that very few have overcome.

Regarding Derek's PhD being an easily provable fact. I definitely
agree. I have absolutly no desire to continue claiming PhD fraud if
in fact Derek has earned a PhD at an accredited college. That is
a part of the reason why I decided to respond before seeking legal
advice. If that is in fact the case then, I wish to remedy it as
soon as possible. My counter proposal to you is really no
different, in my opinion, to what I've already said on-line in the
news group. Your idea of using a lawyer as the third person to validate
the PhD is a new and good idea, though. Maybe this idea will be the
key that makes it happen.

<Mr. Rotbard makes what I think is a reasonable request, that I not
write posts that exacerbate the situation.>

I noticed very recently that it would seem that Derek has toned it
down and I've tried to do the same. If you have any more complaints
about this then, drop me an email and I will stop posting all
together while we're negotiating. (Or until it becomes clear that
this whole thing is a just ruse by Derek to try and do through
threats and intimidation what the truth could not do for him.
That is allow him to freely claim a PhD that he never really earned
at an accredited college. If that is the case then, of course, I
will definitely need to seek legal advice to know where to go
next.) Please don't misinterprete my paranthetical statement, I'm
assuming for now in our negotiations that you're negotiating in
good faith and that Derek indeed has earned a PhD at an accredited
college.

If I'm misusing the term "negotiating in good faith" here then I
apologize and beg that you forgive me and you just try to
understand what I'm saying. My only understanding of this term is
when I bought and sold real estate a few times through real estate
agents and my own innate sense of fairness.

<snip more stuff to protect other people's privacy>

<He will see if using a lawyer as a third party is okay with Derek.>

This sounds like a perfect solution for you, if his PhD has been earned
at an accredited institution. I'm looking forward to your timely response.

Sincerely,
Bill Huffman

---------------------------------------------------------------------

From huffman Tue Mar 24 17:09:13 1998
Subject: Derek postings
To: rot...@ix.netcom.com
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 17:09:13 -0800 (PST)

Dear Eric,

Derek and his (apparent) employees are still discussing the situation under
negotiation. In one Derek seems to say that I'm not cooperating? Do
you feel this is true? Has the current proposal been rejected? Why is it
a problem for me to exacerbate the situation, but, not for Derek?
I feel that Derek is trying to take advantage of the situation.

Thank you,
Bill

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From huffman Wed Mar 25 08:55:50 1998
Subject: Re: Libel
To: rot...@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 08:55:50 -0800 (PST)

I'm assuming you don't plan on responding.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 12:07:06 -0500
From: Eric, he just used a different account
To: bill.h...@sparc.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM
Subject: libel issue

Bill,

<A short note that assured me, we were still negotiating and he
proposes that the AOL attorney could be used as the third party.>

Eric Rotbard

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From huffman Wed Mar 25 15:19:02 1998
Subject: Re: Libel
To: rot...@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 15:19:02 -0800 (PST)

My concern is that there would be other extremely important issues
that wouldn't be verified. For example, it must be an accredited
institution in the normal sense of accredation.

Thank you very much for your quick response to my voicemail.

Sincerely,
Bill

----------------------------------------------------------------


Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 18:28:55 -0500
From: Eric Rotbard <rot...@ix.netcom.com>
To: Bill Huffman <huf...@sparc.sandiegoca.ncr.com>
Subject: Re: Libel

Bill Huffman wrote:
>
> I'm assuming you don't plan on responding.

<He responded in a little more detail and again suggested
using the AOL attorney as the third party.>

Eric

----------------------------------------------------------------

From huffman Wed Mar 25 15:44:16 1998
Subject: Re: Libel
To: rot...@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 15:44:16 -0800 (PST)


<snip stuff to protect other people's privacy.>

Another option would be for me to converse with Charles Curran, Esq. and
verify what it was he planned on validating, (e.g., accredited college).

<snip stuff to protect other people's privacy.>

Bill


-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

Gebhard Blucher

unread,
May 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/15/98
to

LOL!!! I can't believe that D Smart & BC3K is still a topic around
here...

It's been going on for what? Like 2 years now?!? ;D

~ GB

huf...@sandiegoca.ncr.com

unread,
May 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/18/98
to

Part 4 in Derek's attempt to squelch the truth and free speech
by using the threat of lawsuits, covers the period where it
appears, to me, that the other party's plan is to try and pass
off a diploma from an unaccredited institution as proving a PhD
from an accredited college. Also, Derek decides to try and
intervene and use his superior (not a joke) powers of persuasion
to convince me to take down the web page.
March 25 - 27, 1998

interesting note: On the phone, Derek has a persona extremely
different from his on-line persona. IMO, his on line persona
is a megalomaniac jerk. Derek came across on the phone as very
smooth and persuasive, with amazingly big emphasis on the smooth
and persuasive. If you took an extra long and rambling Derek rant
and had it delivered in a smooth and very persuasive manner then,
that is what the conversation (dialog :-) was like. Derek's ability to be
smooth and persuasive cannot be overstated. Derek really has an
extremely strong ability to be smooth and persuasive when he wants
to be, at least on the phone and I suspect in person as well. If you
think of any activity/job that requires the ability to be smooth
and persuasive (politics, used car salesman, etc.) Derek's ability
to be smooth and persuasive would far exceed most of these people.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 18:45:16 -0500


From: Eric Rotbard <rot...@ix.netcom.com>
To: Bill Huffman <huf...@sparc.sandiegoca.ncr.com>
Subject: Re: Libel

Bill Huffman wrote:

> My concern is that there would be other extremely important issues
> that wouldn't be verified. For example, it must be an accredited
> institution in the normal sense of accredation.
>
> Thank you very much for your quick response to my voicemail.
>
> Sincerely,
> Bill

<Mr. Rotbard says he'll ask the registrar from Derek's school for this
and give it to the AOL attorney but, he doesn't want to spend a lot of
time being concerned about issues that are tangential to the main
issue. As long as Derek was awarded a Ph.D., he says, that should
settle things.>

Eric

---------------------------------------------------------------------

From huffman Wed Mar 25 16:35:01 1998


Subject: Re: Libel
To: rot...@ix.netcom.com

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 16:35:01 -0800 (PST)

<snip to protect other people's privacy>

Being accredited or not is NOT tangential. For an example of the
difference you may reference www.<censored>.edu. <I censored the
web address of the bogus school because I don’t want to encourage
PhD fraud.> As an example, for a
few thousand bucks Derek could have applied for a PhD there a few
months a go and have one today. Derek has always said his school
was accredited. If Derek changes his story and admits that it
was not accredited then, we have a totally different situation.

Some other issues that are not tangential, Derek has :
claimed a PhD since at least Dec. 1995,
claimed a PhD in Computer Science

These type of things should be extremely easy to validate.

Bill

----------------------------------------------------------

From: dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart)
To: Bill.H...@sparc.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM
Subject: Re: Further Evidence of PhD Fraud, BC3K
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 20:18:30 GMT

Give me a call on <censored> at your earliest convenience.

Regards


Derek Smart, Ph.D.
Designer/Lead Developer
Battlecruiser:3000AD

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 20:16:48 -0500
To: Bill.H...@sparc.sandiegoca.ncr.com
From: Derek Smart <dsm...@pobox.com>
Subject: Thanks For Calling
Cc: rot...@ix.netcom.com

Bill,

<snip a very pleasant and congenial email to protect Derek's privacy>

Thanks for talking. Take care.

Derek Smart, Ph.D.
Designer/Lead Developer
Battlecruiser:3000AD

---------------------------------------------------------------------
<snip my response to Derek dated 3/27/98>
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 27 Mar 1998 14:44:00 -0500
To: Bill Huffman <huf...@sparc.sandiegoca.ncr.com>
From: Derek Smart <dsm...@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: Thanks For Calling
Cc: rot...@ix.netcom.com, bc3000a...@mindspring.com

At 09:48 AM 3/27/98 -0800, you wrote:
<snip fairly congenial email from Derek to protect his privacy.>
<includes a fairly long rant about take2 and about Fthx and me
and the alleged libel>

Regards

Derek Smart, Ph.D.
Designer/Lead Developer
Battlecruiser:3000AD

Message has been deleted

Bill Huffman

unread,
May 18, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/18/98
to

In article <199805181945...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
Fthx <ft...@aol.com> wrote:
>Bill Huffman said, citing the Taco Supreme Commander:

>
>><snip fairly congenial email from Derek to protect his privacy.>
>><includes a fairly long rant about take2 and about Fthx and me
>>and the alleged libel>
>
>Was the Coke Machine mentioned? I'm eager to learn yet another valuable lesson
>in laughter.
>
>fthx
>http://members.aol.com/Derekology/BashersForJustice
>http://members.aol.com/fthx/bc3k/DerekSmartPhDFraudAnthology2.txt

Assuming your question wasn't rhetorical (which is probably incorrect),
the coke machine was not mentioned. It was a rant about how
everyone has treated poor Mr. Smart so unfairly and he is not going
to take it anymore, no matter what it costs. It was a fine rant, IMHO.
Maybe Derek would like to post it? Actually, if Derek would like to
post any of the correspondence that took place, he has my full
permission. In order to keep a firm footing on the moral high ground.
I decided that without Derek's permission, I shouldn't break the
netiquette rule about posting emails. To tell the truth, I never
bothered even asking him for permission. I got the distinct impression
from Derek's last email that he was NOT my best friend and he wouldn't
be happy about getting any more emails from me. Actually Fthx, I'm
afraid you might also fall into that same category.

As far as my lesson goes, I now like to keep a spare pair of shoes
handy, in case of emergencies. It is a very expensive lesson. Shoes
can be quite expensive. However, I'm not yet convinced that it was
a valuable lesson. :-)

bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com

unread,
May 19, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/19/98
to

Part 5 in Derek's attempt to squelch the truth and free speech
using the threat of a lawsuit, covers the period where it appears
that the other party's plan is to just stall/ignore in the hopes
that I "crack" and take the web page down. From my perspective
we're in a state of limbo because, I've made it clear that an
unaccredited institution is not the same as accredited. Eric might
still be hoping that he can cloud this issue through the AOL
attorney, but, he’s never (and never has) responded to this issue.
The bottom line is that apparently zero progress is being made
toward our little agreement of using a third party. I finally decide
to stir the pot a little and see what stirs up. What floats up is a big
stinky turd (apparently a lie). :-)
April 02 - 13, 1998

Note: I believe that Eric Rotbard has tried at all times to be
completely truthful (to his credit) as well as trying to do what
every good lawyer should do, trying to do what is in the best
interests of his client. I think without knowing it, he just let
a Derek fabrication slip by.

---------------------------------------------------------------
<snip an email exchange with Derek regarding a Kevin McGuire post
that I responded to and Derek didn't like. I copy Derek's on-line
response to this post below, from 4/2/98.>
---------------------------------------------------------------------

From huffman Tue Apr 7 09:40:20 1998
Subject: What is the current state?
To: rot...@ix.netcom.com
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 09:40:20 -0700 (PDT)

Dear Mr. Rotbard,

<snip a stuff to protect the privacy of others>

Derek Smart still seemed to be threatening a law suit. This seems
to be contradictory to the facts as I understand them. Therefore,
I assume that I'm simply misunderstanding some aspect of the
situation. Can you please try to clear it up for me?

Thank you very much,
Bill

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1998 19:41:02 -0400


From: Eric Rotbard <rot...@ix.netcom.com>
To: Bill Huffman <huf...@sparc.sandiegoca.ncr.com>

Subject: Re: What is the current state?

Bill Huffman wrote:
>
> Dear Mr. Rotbard,
>
> <snip a stuff to protect the privacy of others>
>
> Derek Smart's admission validates the truth of the web page.
> Derek Smart still seemed to be threatening a law suit. This seems
> to be contradictory to the facts as I understand them. Therefore,
> I assume that I'm simply misunderstanding some aspect of the
> situation. Can you please try to clear it up for me?
>
> Thank you very much,
> Bill

<snip stuff for the privacy of others, one thing that Rotbard does
state seems to be the same nonsense from a 4/2/98 post by Derek.
Here it is -
...............................................................
Subject: Re: BC3K - PC GAMER [May Issue]
From: dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart)
Date: 1998/04/02
Newsgroups: alt.games.bc3000ad,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic

On 1 Apr 1998 08:08:33 -0800, huf...@news.SanDiegoCA.ATTGIS.COM (Bill
Huffman)
wrote:

>In article <6frg3c$17o$1...@netnews.upenn.edu>,
>Kevin McGuire <Kevin McGuire kevin...@sas.upenn.edu.moo> wrote:
>>Derek Smart (dsm...@pobox.com) wrote:
>>: On Tue, 31 Mar 1998 03:34:46 GMT, je...@newman.com (kman) wrote:
>>: First of all, ALL these posts are true to form coming from detractors.
Now,
>>: where's the surprise. So, ALL of it is ignored by ALL of us who
>>: (a) know better (b) don't take detractor crap seriously anyway.
>>
>>So, having failed to rebut any of the (quite reasonable, actually)
>>criticisms in earlier posts, Derek tries a blanket denial. It still
>>doesn't cut it.
>>
>>: Derek Smart, Ph.D.?
>>
>>For a possible explanation of why Derek won't name his alma mater, check
out:
>>http://www.phillynews.com/inquirer/98/Mar/31/front_page/DIP31.htm
>
>I believe the above is an excellent explanation of the differences
>between an accredited school and an unaccredited institution. If the
>PhD granting institution is unaccredited then, any dissertations will
>of course not be listed. For many (if not most) unaccredited
>institutions, their diploma is not worth the paper it's printed on.

That's incorrect Bill because accreditation is dependent on the country
issuing
it (as far as I know). An institution not recognized in the US as being
accredited (by the US) does not invalidate the accreditation in the country of
issuance.

This is _exactly_ the sort of nonsense that lands you in trouble. If I'm
mistaken, I expect someone to correct me. But I seriously doubt it.

Derek Smart, Ph.D.
..........................................................................>
<note: Derek makes the bogus implication in this post that accreditation by
USA agencies could ever have any relevence to schools chartered outside
the USA.>


<snip some stuff for the privacy of others>

Eric Rotbard

---------------------------------------------------------------------

From huffman Mon Apr 13 10:12:25 1998
Subject: Re: What is the current state?
To: rot...@ix.netcom.com
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:12:25 -0700 (PDT)

Eric Rotbard wrote on April 7, 1998:

<snip copy of old email>

Dear Mr. Rotbard,

Thank you very much for responding so quickly. Sorry I haven't responded
sooner. I've been on Easter/Passover Holiday the last few days. I hope
your holiday was also very pleasant.

>The fact that his alma mater may not be accredited in the US does not
>invalidate the Ph. D., or render it a fraud.

I'm not sure what this means. It appears that what you're referring to
is an apparent fabrication that Derek posted to the c.s.i.p.g.s. news
group a week or so a go and it was the same thing that he told me on
phone, that is that his school is in England and was not recognized as
accredited by the USA accrediting agency, but was recognized in England.
This apparent fabrication, I would guess, was spun in order to try and
place his diploma granting entity in a gray area somewhere between
accredited and unaccredited. This is nonsense since the bona fide
accrediting agencies within the USA only deal with schools that apply
for accreditation within their region. They do not concern themselves
with foreign schools.

This information is explained plainly in a book I have "Bear's Guide
to Earning College Degrees Nontraditionally" by John B. Bear, Ph.D. &
Mariah P. Bear, M.A. It states that "accreditation" in Britain means
the school must "operate under a Royal Charter or an Act of Parliament
(the two ways schools become legitmately recognized in Britain).",
page 252. I recommend you order the book from, C&B Publishing,
(707) 746-8535, or you may even visit their web page at www.degree.net.
Accreditation can be a confusing topic. It seems that you do not have
a good handle on the facts. With this book you can make statements
that have a basis in fact when it comes to how accreditation works
(and doesn't work, when diploma mills are allowed to flourish).

The Bear's Guide likely has Derek Smart's alma mater listed. For
example, if it is Sussex College of Technology, then that is in
the Degree Mills chapter and that would mean that the diploma was a
bogus sham. "A goodly number of degree mills have operated from
England, selling their product only to people in other countries
(primarily the U.S., Africa, and Asia). Many British authorities seem
not to care as long as the only victims are foreigners", page 251.
I believe, a degree from any one of the many British entities listed
in Chapter 25 Degree Mills would be considered a fraud, if the holder
of the bogus degree tried to advertise it as legitimate. For example,
it had been claimed that the school was accredited, when in fact it
is not.

>Whether or not there was a
>miscommunication in the various usenet posts as to where the school is
>accredited does not give you the license to claim he is a fraud.

If Derek's school is in England it is nonsense to say it should be
accredited in the USA. I never said that. The above statement is
apparently a continued reference to the fabrication by Derek Smart.
Derek claimed that the granting entity of his PhD diploma was
accredited. Derek states it very plainly in the following post.

..............................................................
Subject: Re: Question for Derek
From: dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart)
Date: 1997/09/28
Message-ID: <60lveb$6...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic

On Sun, 28 Sep 1997 05:12:28 GMT, al...@cornell.edu (Adam Littman) wrote:
...snip I (Bill Huffman) removed irrelevent stuff from here...
>BTW, I saw the heading of a post claiming your PhD isn't real, I didn't read
>the post, what is the story? What is it in and where did you get it?

The question of my PH.D. has generated more consipiracy theories than a good
thriller. My response remains the same. My personal life and everything
concerning it, are no concern of yours nor the UseNet. My PH.D. is in Computer
Science from a renowed accredited college. My concern is not what others
believe and I refuse, as I always have, to succumb to character assassination
and the personal vendettas that others have instigated and initiated here in
order to discredit me.

I am who I am and I know who I am and those who know who I am know that I am
who I am.

Derek Smart, Ph.D.
Designer/Lead Developer
Battlecruiser:3000AD

..............................................................

<snip stuff to protect the privacy of others>

I believe you should get the book I suggested, that way you would
really know whether or not Derek's Ph.D. is bona fide. As I stated
previously, it would be fine to use the AOL attorney. I would want
to communicate with him to see what he thought constituted a bona
fide Ph.D. For example, being from England that would mean that the
school was operating under a Royal Charter or an Act of Parliament.
This is what I stated in a previous email to you when you asked the
same question.

<snip stuff to protect the privacy of others>

Like I've said many times before, I'm only interested in the truth.
If Derek has a bona fide PhD from a legitimate school then no one
would be able to stop me from taking it down. The quickest why to
make this happen would be to give me the name of the school and I
can check whether or not the school is in the Degree Mills chapter
or one of the other six chapters that describe other schools. If
it's a bona fide school then, a simple call to validate the degree
and, we would be done. This could have been settled weeks a go. If
Derek has a bona fide degree, I really don't understand why it is
necessary to drag it out so long.

Thanks again for responding,
Bill Huffman

P.S. I thought you were planning on responding to some of my previous
posts in some detail after your trial was over and you had a little
more time?

---------------------------------------------------------------------

From huffman Mon Apr 13 14:41:29 1998
Subject: Suggestion from Eric Rotbard, Derek Smart's Attorney
To: <censored, I attempted to get this to the AOL attorney>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 14:41:29 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: rot...@ix.netcom.com

Dear Sir,

I hope I got the proper email address. I'm trying to reach an AOL
lawyer named Mr. Curran, Esq.

I have been negotiating with a Eric Rotbard, Esq., regarding a
web page that I put up, www.angelfire.com/ca/PhDFraud. Mr Rotbard
has suggested a couple of times (3?) that I use you to validate Derek
Smart's PhD. He has neglected to provide me with your email address,
however. That is why I'm not sure that I got the address correct.
(Note: I've included a copy of this email to Mr. Rotbard.)

To give you the background on what has been happening on my end,
I've attached my most recent email to Mr. Rotbard.

The bottom line is that I understand that you've been told the
name of Derek's alma mater. So, you could validate that Derek
actually earned a PhD there. My question is whether or not you
were going to also validate that the school was a fully recognized
school in England and not just a diploma mill. You may reference
details in the attachment, as to what this means. As the attachment
states, there are a good number of British based diploma mills that
cater to USA residents. If you were going to validate this point as
well then, I might agree to Mr. Rotbard's suggestion. What should
also be validated is that Derek earned the degree by December 1995,
which is the earliest I've seen him claiming a PhD and also that
the PhD is in Computer Science (which Derek has repeated many times
on-line).

Thank you very much,
Bill Huffman

P.S. I'm not a lawyer. So, if I've broken any assumed protocols
then, I plead ignorance and must humbly beg your forgiveness.

-----attachment follows---------------------------------
I just attached my last correspondence to Mr. Rotbard (see above).

JackyO

unread,
May 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/20/98
to

So whatever happened? Where does this all stand?

bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com

unread,
May 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/20/98
to

Part 6 in Derek's attempt to squelch the truth and free speech
by using threats of a lawsuit, covers the period where it appears
that the other party's plan is to still try to stall/ignore. There's
a number of important issues that Mr. Rotbard has left on the table
and never bothered trying to address them. I decide that maybe
Derek has decided to stop wasting his money on lawyer fees so,
I test the water.
April 13 - 22, 1998

note: In this first email, after I’ve accused Mr. Rotbard of parroting
a Derek lie and go to great length explaining why I thought it was
a lie, he totally ignores it all.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 19:36:03 -0400


From: Eric Rotbard <rot...@ix.netcom.com>
To: Bill Huffman <huf...@sparc.sandiegoca.ncr.com>
Subject: Re: What is the current state?

Bill,

<He says that he's expecting some information from Derek's school.
After he reviews it then, he'll talk more about this issue.>

Eric Rotbard

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From huffman Wed Apr 22 09:19:43 1998
Subject: Here's my understanding
To: rot...@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 09:19:43 -0700 (PDT)

Dear Mr. Eric Rotbard,

If/When it was clear to both of us that Derek didn't earn a PhD
at a bona fide school, my assumption has been that these negotiations
would likely go into a mode where you would just ignore/stall. It
appears that is now the case. So, there were a couple of loose
ends I'd like to try to clean up. First, list all the diploma mills
in Bear's book. Secondly, a note that may be of personal interest
to you and a preview copy of an update to my web page.

I collected the list of PhD scam diploma mills from Bear's book
that I mentioned to you previously. These are from his chapter 25
that I also mentioned in the same previous post. Here's some
detail Dr. Bear gives for one diploma mill, as an example.

"Sussex College of Technology, Sussex, England. Perhaps the oldest of
Britian's degree mills, Sussex is run by "Dr." Bruce Copen from his
home, south of London. At the same address, but with different
catalogs are the Brantridge Forest School and the University of the
Science of Man. Each offer "earned" degrees for which a few
correspondence are required, and "extension awards" which are the same
degrees and diplomas for no work at all. Honorary Doctorates are
offered free, but there is a $100 engraving charge. "Professor
Emeritas"[sic] status costs another $100. One flyer admits Sussex
is not "accrediated" [sic] but goes on to say that "No student who
has taken our courses and awards have to date had problems." This
statement would not be accepted by, among many others, a former
high-level state official in Colorado who lost his job when the
source of his Doctorate was discovered. Sussex continues to advertise
extensively in newspapers and magazines in the U.S. and worldwide.
In 1988, a new British law came into effect, forbidding such "schools"
to accept students who enrolled after May 1st. Sussex's solution to
this minor annoyance was to offer to back-date all applications to
April 30th, 1988 - a creative response that British law apparantly
hasn't caught up with yet."

The following list is not claimed to be complete. The nature of this
type scam would make that almost impossible. Also, it is apparantly
very common for the con artists to slightly change the name of their
"school" from time to time. They also sometimes like to try to pick
names that are very close to accredited schools. I assume that
Derek's PhD was purchased from one of these "schools", if so then,
his PhD is a fraud and in that case I wouldn't really expect to hear
from you again.

List of Chapter 25 Diploma Mills that appear to be in England.

Academy College of Holy Studies
Academy of the Science of Man
Albany Educational Services
Avatar Episcopal University
Avatar International University
Brantridge Forest School
British College of Soma-Therapy
British Collegiate Institute
Broadhurst University
California Institute of Higher Learning
Central School of Religion
City Medical Correspondence College
College of Applied Science London
College of Divine Metaphysics
College of Spiritual Sciences
Collegium Technologicum Sussexensis Britannia
Creative University of Southeast London
Cromwell University
Ecclesiastical University of Sheffield
Episcopal University of London
European College of Science and Man
Faraday College
Gordon Arlen College
Harley University
Inter-State College
International Protestant Birkbest College
London College of Physiology
London College of Theology
London Educational College
London Institute for Applied Research
London School for Social Research
London Tottenham International Christian University
Lyne College
Metropolitan Collegiate
Ministerial Training College
Morton-Colwyn University
National Ecclesiastical University
National University of Sheffield
Nebraska College of Physical Medicine
Newcastle University
Northwest London University
Obura University
Oxford College of Applied Science
Oxford Institute for Applied Research
Saint John Chrysostom College
School of Applied Sciences
School of Psychology and Psychotherapy
Shield College
South Eastern Extension College
Southern Eastern University
Sussex College of Technology
Trinity Collegiate Institute
United Free University of England
Universal Ecclesiastical University
Universitas Iltiensis
Universitates Sheffieldensis
University of London
University of Coventry
University of England
University of England at Oxford
University of Sheffield
University of Sulgrave
University of the Old Catholic Church
University of the Science of Man
University of Winchester
West London College of Technology
Western Orthodox University
Whitby Hall College
Wordsworth Memorial University
..............................................................

I was planning on updating my web page. Here is a preview copy
that you may review. I would, of course, be very interested in any
thing in here that you believe to be false or misleading. If you
let me know I will, of course, correct it. What may be of personal
interest to you is copies of our correspondence that I plan on
making available as "BACKGROUND INFORMATION". Unless I hear
differently from you, my plan is to censore out the phone number
of your law firm, okay? I don't plan on censoring out your email
address, okay? Based on postings to the news groups from you that
I read, I assume that this is the way you want it.

..............................................................

<html>
<head>
<title>Ph.D. Frauds</title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#2400ff" text="#ffffff" link="#ff18ff" vlink="#ffff80">
<p>
<center>
(last modified 4/22/98)
</center>
<p>
Derek Smart, author of a mediocre computer game called Battlecruiser
3000ad (BC3K), is widely known on Usenet as being the focus of the
largest and longest running flame-fest ever seen, this occurs primarily
in the comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (c.s.i.p.g.s.) news group.
<p>
INTRODUCTION<br>
Derek Smart has claimed to have a PhD in almost every post he's made
over the past few years. Prior to the PhD wars (8/8/97 - present),
whenever anyone had asked about details he was strangely silent. The
biggest braggart many have ever seen being silent on such occasions
seemed very "out of character". This coupled with my observation of many
months of Derek lies, lead me to suspect that Derek's PhD was a fake.
After gathering further evidence, it's believed this is now an
inescapable conclusion.
<p>
Here's some things Derek has said about his studies. He has said that he
studied only part time. He's said that he studied in the USA and England.
He's said that it was a mail order college. He's more recently said his
school is in England. He's stated it wasn't important whether his school
was accredited or not. He's said it's a renowned accredited college. He's
said it's a small tech institute. He's said he grew up in England and
moved to the USA in 1989.
<p>
SUMMARY<br>
This presentation argues that Derek's PhD is a fraud. It consists of
four firmly established facts. These facts taken together, show that his
PhD is a probable fraud. Derek has not earned a PhD at any accredited
university.
<p>
FACT 1: Derek Smart's PhD dissertation is not listed anywhere.<br>
(Almost all PhD dissertations are listed in DAI or somewhere.)
<p>
FACT 2: Derek has not provided simple information.<br>
(Derek hasn't named his alma mater, among other things.)
<p>
FACT 3: Derek Smart has changed the story about his PhD.<br>
(He said his dissertation was published now, he says it's not.)
<p>
FACT 4: <snipped to maintain some level of suspense>

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 19:35:22 -0400


From: Eric Rotbard <rot...@ix.netcom.com>
To: Bill Huffman <huf...@sparc.sandiegoca.ncr.com>

CC: Derek Smart <dsm...@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: Here's my understanding

Mr. Huffman,

<snip stuff to protect the privacy of others , basically Mr. Rotbard says
that I made mistakes and that I'm incorrect. This has bothered him and
Derek and made them unhappy with me. He warns that I had better not
make the changes to the web page. He points out some specific examples
of areas that he believes are fallacious.>

Sincerely,

Eric Rotbard

B P

unread,
May 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/20/98
to

On Wed, 20 May 1998 17:16:28 GMT, bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com
wrote:

Damn Bill you must be costing Derek a bundle !!
Good work keep it up!!

>Part 6 in Derek's attempt to squelch the truth and free speech
>by using threats of a lawsuit, covers the period where it appears

>Mr. Huffman,


>
><snip stuff to protect the privacy of others , basically Mr. Rotbard says
>that I made mistakes and that I'm incorrect. This has bothered him and
>Derek and made them unhappy with me. He warns that I had better not
>make the changes to the web page. He points out some specific examples
>of areas that he believes are fallacious.>

Does he believe them to be fallacious ? Or are they fallacious ?

PJL

unread,
May 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/20/98
to


bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com wrote in article
<6jv35c$v5h$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...


>
> List of Chapter 25 Diploma Mills that appear to be in England.
>
> Academy College of Holy Studies
> Academy of the Science of Man
> Albany Educational Services

Gosh, these guys couldn't even think up a name with
college or university in the title.

> Avatar Episcopal University
> Avatar International University

Wasn't the Avatar in the Ultima games?

> Brantridge Forest School
> British College of Soma-Therapy

Soma? Wasn't that the happy pill from 'Brave New World?'

> City Medical Correspondence College

Yeah, I'd trust an MD from correspondence school.
How do you play cut class in correspondence school?
Send back empty envelopes.

> Harley University

Now if this was Harley Davidson College, I might be interested.

> Oxford College of Applied Science
> Oxford Institute for Applied Research

I was half expecting an 'Oxbridge' University

> Saint John Chrysostom College

FYI 'Chrysostom' means 'golden tongued.'

> ..............................................................

--
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Pat Lundrigan
///////////////

Jimmy Chan

unread,
May 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/20/98
to

bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com wrote:
:#This statement would not be accepted by, among many others, a former
:#high-level state official in Colorado who lost his job when the
:#source of his Doctorate was discovered.

Was this the one that aired on CNN about falsifying resumes? They said a
majority of resumes contain false information and there was a person hired
based upon his resume that he had a PhD but when a co-worker asked him what
his dissertation was on he was stuck and they eventually found out he was a
fraud and terminated him. I recalled that he was hired for a somewhat high
level position, though not sure if it was a state job or private company.

--
==============================ji...@hawaii.edu===============================

bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com

unread,
May 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/21/98
to

In article <3562F0...@TennetNOSPAMMERS.COM>,
JJ...@TennetNOSPAMMERS.COM wrote:

> So whatever happened? Where does this all stand?

By now you've probably seen Part 6. I'm just collecting together
the exchanges and posting them as a new Part. I'm currently working
on Part 7. I'm guessing that I'll be done at Part 8.

Where does it all stand? Good question, according to the last
Bashers for Justice edition, I had to change my shoes after Derek's
visit. According to Derek, (here's a teaser) he's going to destroy me.
Period. And I won't be able to make it up to him by washing his car
because I'm not worthy enough of a human being to even do that. And,
the lawsuit is being filed. (There really is some good stuff that I
don't plan on making public without Derek's permission. However, I give
my permission to Derek to post any and all of the correspondence that
took place. I've just decided it best that I maintain the moral high
ground and not post other people's email to me, without permission or,
as evidence to correct any false statement that might be made.)

After all of the "Parts" are posted, I think you'll be in as good a
position as anyone to decide where things stand. (except of course for
Derek, his lawyer and probably Dan Brooks who knows what's going on)

B P

unread,
May 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/21/98
to

On Thu, 21 May 1998 15:37:35 GMT, bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com
wrote:

>
>After all of the "Parts" are posted, I think you'll be in as good a
>position as anyone to decide where things stand. (except of course for
>Derek, his lawyer and probably Dan Brooks who knows what's going on)

Dan Brooks ??
Well I guess it figures that Derek would keep his girlfriend up to
date. Do you think he tells him over the pillow talk or during/for
foreplay?

Gary Hladik

unread,
May 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/21/98
to

huf...@news.SanDiegoCA.ATTGIS.COM (Bill Huffman) writes:

[snip]

>In my proposed changes to the web page that I sent to the lawyer
>(i.e., not in the current version), I used the term "negotiations"
>when I was just referring to the whole series of email exchanges we'd
>had. He seemed to make a big deal out of the fact that most of the
>email was not "negotiations". Also, I said the onus was on Derek to
>prove his PhD, not, on me to prove he didn't have a PhD. This was the
>last change to the current page, I believe, where I tried to "fix"
>this statement. My conclusion on these two things was that "onus"
>and "negotiations" probably have very strict definitions to lawyers
>and my use was wrong by the lawyer definition.

Mr. Rotbard is a lawyer. His job is to represent the best interests of
his client by any legal/ethical means. If that means stretching a
definition or two, no problem. So while these terms may indeed have rigid
"legal" meanings, I suspect that Dr. Smart's lawyer is really just
nitpicking.

[snip]

>My understanding of fraud is one who is not what he pretends to be or
>an imposter. If Derek is pretending to have earned a PhD at an
>accredited college then, that would seem to fit into the category of
>fraud? Further and even more sinister, if you say that the PhD "bears
>on Derek's profession" (which in a post Derek has denied, btw) then
>that would seem to also fit another definition of fraud, intentional
>perversion of the truth in order to induce another to part with
>something of value? Even though Derek has never turned in an application
>for a job while claiming a PhD (which I believe, is part of what Derek was
>arguing in the post), the mere fact that he claims a PhD that "bears
>on his profession" might be enough to show that he is trying to induce
>someone to part with something of value by perversion of the truth,
>especially considering the fact that he hypes his game here.

If memory serves, hasn't Dr. Smart written that his PhD thesis was
"suppressed" because it contained information of commercial value that
was incorporated into the BC3K game, specifically the AI? If so,
wouldn't this link the degree claim to what was at one time a commercial
product?

>This would
>seem to mean that maybe Derek should be concerned about his local
>District Attorney becoming interested?

I hope not. I don't want DAs involved in Usenet flame wars any more than I
want lawyers sticking their noses in (no offense to Mr. Rotbard). :-)

Gary

Jimmy Chan

unread,
May 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/21/98
to

Gary Hladik (ga...@netcom.com) wrote:
:#If memory serves, hasn't Dr. Smart written that his PhD thesis was
:#"suppressed" because it contained information of commercial value that
:#was incorporated into the BC3K game, specifically the AI? If so,
:#wouldn't this link the degree claim to what was at one time a commercial
:#product?

You know that claim of DS's must be one of the most ludicrous claims that
he has made. Seriously, if his supposed AI is/was as good as he claims it
is/was then the real money to be made is in the defense industry, why a
game? Though DS seems to have at least made $600K by scamming people,
he makes a better swindler than a game developer.

--
==============================ji...@hawaii.edu===============================

bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com

unread,
May 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/21/98
to

In article <3564633c...@news.mindspring.com>,

six...@mindspring.com (B P) wrote:
>
> On Thu, 21 May 1998 15:37:35 GMT, bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com
> wrote:
>
> >
> >After all of the "Parts" are posted, I think you'll be in as good a
> >position as anyone to decide where things stand. (except of course for
> >Derek, his lawyer and probably Dan Brooks who knows what's going on)
> Dan Brooks ??
> Well I guess it figures that Derek would keep his girlfriend up to
> date. Do you think he tells him over the pillow talk or during/for
> foreplay?

They are in different time zones, I believe. Derek seems to get along
better with people that don't live near him? Maybe that's why his
lawyer is in NY? :-)

B P

unread,
May 22, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/22/98
to

>
>They are in different time zones, I believe. Derek seems to get along
>better with people that don't live near him? Maybe that's why his
>lawyer is in NY? :-)

Hmmm I live in Fl (about 3 hours drive 1.5 if you have a BMW with
those cool retractable roll bars) and he hates me..... maybe you
have something there, Bill.

B P

unread,
May 22, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/22/98
to

On 21 May 1998 19:12:36 GMT, ji...@Hawaii.Edu (Jimmy Chan) wrote:

>Gary Hladik (ga...@netcom.com) wrote:
>:#If memory serves, hasn't Dr. Smart written that his PhD thesis was
>:#"suppressed" because it contained information of commercial value that
>:#was incorporated into the BC3K game, specifically the AI? If so,
>:#wouldn't this link the degree claim to what was at one time a commercial
>:#product?
>
>You know that claim of DS's must be one of the most ludicrous claims that
>he has made. Seriously, if his supposed AI is/was as good as he claims it
>is/was then the real money to be made is in the defense industry, why a
>game? Though DS seems to have at least made $600K by scamming people,
>he makes a better swindler than a game developer.
>

Well he claimed he spent 4.5 mill delveloping it.
Guess that PhD in computer Sci. cost more than he expected.
>--
>==============================ji...@hawaii.edu===============================
>
>


JackyO

unread,
May 22, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/22/98
to

bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com wrote:
>
> In article <3562F0...@TennetNOSPAMMERS.COM>,
> JJ...@TennetNOSPAMMERS.COM wrote:
>
> > So whatever happened? Where does this all stand?
>
> By now you've probably seen Part 6. I'm just collecting together
> the exchanges and posting them as a new Part. I'm currently working
> on Part 7. I'm guessing that I'll be done at Part 8.
>
> Where does it all stand? Good question, according to the last
> Bashers for Justice edition, I had to change my shoes after Derek's
> visit. According to Derek, (here's a teaser) he's going to destroy me.
> Period. And I won't be able to make it up to him by washing his car
> because I'm not worthy enough of a human being to even do that. And,
> the lawsuit is being filed. (There really is some good stuff that I
> don't plan on making public without Derek's permission. However, I give
> my permission to Derek to post any and all of the correspondence that
> took place. I've just decided it best that I maintain the moral high
> ground and not post other people's email to me, without permission or,
> as evidence to correct any false statement that might be made.)
>
> After all of the "Parts" are posted, I think you'll be in as good a
> position as anyone to decide where things stand. (except of course for
> Derek, his lawyer and probably Dan Brooks who knows what's going on)
>
>

Ok, thanks for the heads-up. What happened to Dan Brooks, anyway? Last I
remember, you two were slugging it out over dates and 'incompetencies'.

Maybe Derek called them <the three of them - Ballinger, Muller, and
Brooks> off in the hope of this thing finally going away?

Also, have you had ANY further correspondence from Mr. Rotbard, Internet
Attorney Extraordinaire?

lholt

unread,
May 22, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/22/98
to

Hey Jimmy,

Could you conceive of someone being motivated by something other than
real money?

Jimmy Chan wrote:
>
> Gary Hladik (ga...@netcom.com) wrote:
> :#If memory serves, hasn't Dr. Smart written that his PhD thesis was
> :#"suppressed" because it contained information of commercial value that
> :#was incorporated into the BC3K game, specifically the AI? If so,
> :#wouldn't this link the degree claim to what was at one time a commercial
> :#product?
>
> You know that claim of DS's must be one of the most ludicrous claims that
> he has made. Seriously, if his supposed AI is/was as good as he claims it
> is/was then the real money to be made is in the defense industry, why a

^^^^^^^^^^


> game? Though DS seems to have at least made $600K by scamming people,
> he makes a better swindler than a game developer.
>
>

--------------------------------
Larry Holt
To reply, remove XXX from my email.
Real people will figure it out, spambots won't.
Which are you?
--------------------------------

bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com

unread,
May 22, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/22/98
to

In article <35656da7...@news.mindspring.com>,
six...@mindspring.com (B P) wrote:

>
> On 21 May 1998 19:12:36 GMT, ji...@Hawaii.Edu (Jimmy Chan) wrote:
>
> >Gary Hladik (ga...@netcom.com) wrote:
> >:#If memory serves, hasn't Dr. Smart written that his PhD thesis was
> >:#"suppressed" because it contained information of commercial value that
> >:#was incorporated into the BC3K game, specifically the AI? If so,
> >:#wouldn't this link the degree claim to what was at one time a commercial
> >:#product?
> >
> >You know that claim of DS's must be one of the most ludicrous claims that
> >he has made. Seriously, if his supposed AI is/was as good as he claims it
> >is/was then the real money to be made is in the defense industry, why a
> >game? Though DS seems to have at least made $600K by scamming people,
> >he makes a better swindler than a game developer.
> >
> Well he claimed he spent 4.5 mill delveloping it.
> Guess that PhD in computer Sci. cost more than he expected.

Actually, I think what might have happened is the con artist that Derek
got his PhD from in England kept making spelling corrections to Derek's
thesis. Derek had mistakenly placed his thesis in the one-way-frame early.
So, he had to keep sending the whole thesis (both pages) and the two
frames (one for each page) back and forth to England. The mail expenses
added up and maybe the con artist charged by the pound also. (after all,
he is in England where they usually do charge by the pound) It all added
up to lot's of pounds then, when derek converted it to dollars he messed
up the arithmetic and missed the placement of the decimal point by an
order of magnitude or two.

bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com

unread,
May 22, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/22/98
to

Part 7 in Derek's attempt to squelch the truth and free speech
by using the threat of a lawsuit, covers the period where it
appears that the other party seems to be reaching the end of
the road.
April 22 - 26, 1998

interesting note: Mr. Rotbard never denied that Derek's "alma
mater" was one of the 69 bogus schools listed in Chapter 25.
I would have thought that they would have jumped at the chance
to climb all over me should Derek's alma mater not be listed
there.

humorous note: Nick (the FBI agent firmly in Derek's corner :-)
makes a reappearance in Derek's email.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 20:32:31 -0400
To: rot...@ix.netcom.com, Bill Huffman <huf...@sparc.sandiegoca.ncr.com>
From: Derek Smart <dsm...@pobox.com>


Subject: Re: Here's my understanding

At 07:35 PM 4/22/98 -0400, Eric Rotbard wrote:
>Mr. Huffman,
>
>I am still awaiting a certification from Derek's registrar. Once I
>receive it, I will take appropriate action.

Eric

<Derek starts to talk tougher. He calls me some profane names (but,
not real bad by Derek standards) and even mentions Nick, the FBI
agent who is helping Derek. Nick has given Derek some more good
information and I'm in even bigger trouble now.>

-------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Dan Brooks" <comput...@msn.com>
To: <bill.h...@sparc.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM>
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 12:00:33 -0500

<Dan makes some snide comments that are obviously meant to try and
scare me.>

Dan Brooks
________________________
Computer Rescue
St. Louis, MO

--------------------------------------------------------------------

From huffman Fri Apr 24 09:06:16 1998
Subject: So, we're still in negotiations?
To: rot...@ix.netcom.com
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 1998 09:06:16 -0700 (PDT)

Dear Mr Rotbard,

>
>Mr. Huffman,
>
>I am still awaiting a certification from Derek's registrar. Once I
>receive it, I will take appropriate action.

When do you expect to receive it?

<snip stuff to protect the privacy of others>

Please provide me with the email address for Charles Curran, Esq.
Since I copied you on an attempted correspondence with Mr. Curran,
I'm sure you are aware that I attempted to contact him.
I've previously told you that I would like to communicate with him.
Since you hadn't given me his email address I tried to contact him
on my own. I assume I used the wrong address because, I never got a
response. I've said multiple times that he would suffice as the
third party if he was going to validate graduation and the
accreditation of the school. If after a very short exchange with
Mr. Curran, I decide for some reason that I would rather use a
different attorney as a third party then, I have a proposal ready
as to who that might be.

There has been unclear indications that Derek's school may not be
accredited. If in fact that is the case then, I would like to know.
The last totally clear statement on this issue was Derek Smart
clearly claiming his alma mater was a renowned accredited college.
I copied that post for you in a previous email. In my opinion, as
you know, that being true or untrue is not a tangential issue. I've
mentioned this a number of times and I have not as yet gotten a
response from you on this matter. You seem to just ignore it.
Do you accept my desire that accreditation be validated or not?
I apologize if my position was unclear but, it seems to me, that
you've been doing more ignoring than negotiating.

<snip stuff to protect the privacy of others>

Is Derek's alma mater in the list of "schools" that I copied out of
Dr Bear's book and provided to you in my last correspondence? If you
ignore this question then, it seems difficult to come to any other
conclusion. If it is one of the "schools" in the list then, it would
seem that Dr. Bear would consider the PhD bogus.

<snip stuff to protect the privacy of others>

Good sir, you have apparently misunderstood what this was meant to
say, since you left out the important next line.
"As long as he refuses to name his school, people are going to
conclude that it is a fraud."
What I meant was that as long as Derek doesn't name his school,
I believe that people are going to naturally conclude that the
PhD is probably bogus. If Derek doesn't like this (which seems
obvious) then, the onus is on Derek to name his school or to stop
claiming a PhD, the onus is not on anyone else to "prove" that it
is in fact bogus.

Thank you for pointing out an apparent unclear area in the text.

>If your intent was to further antagonize Derek and annoy me, you have
>succeeded.

Of course, that is not my intent. Here's the situation as I saw it,
Mr. Rotbard. It seems to me, proving a valid degree should be an
extremely simple and quick procedure. I'd guess, it's done hundreds,
if not thousands of times a day throughout the world. It is
obvious that Mr. Smart would like the web page taken down. So,
why would there need to be what appears to be stalling on your
part? Also, you were no longer responding in any detail at all
to my correspondence? For example the accreditation issue, you
claim it is a tangential issue. I thought I made it clear that it
was not a tangential issue, to me. Yet, you have never responded
to this point. Do you accept validation of accreditation or not? I
don't even know that! My request to converse with Mr. Curran has
had no response from you. Finally, your most recent email of any
real substance to me before my last response, apparently had what
I consider significant falsehoods in it. I go to great length
trying to point out why I think it may be incorrect and you just
totally ignore the whole thing! It was apparently supposed to mean
something, after all you said it. It may be false, yet, you
ignore it all. You will probably continue to ignore it, which can
only seem to provide more evidence that it was in fact a falsehood.
It seemed reasonable to me to conclude that you were just stalling
and ignoring me and these negotiations.

<snip stuff to protect the privacy of others>

How could I be more reasonable? You have said that Derek has a bona
fide PhD. I've said that if he has a PhD from an accredited college
I would insist on apologizing and would take down the web page.
I even offered to correct anyone I saw questioning Derek's PhD,
if Derek wanted me too! I believe that I've been very responsive
to your every email. I believe that I've tried to respond to each
issue or concern you've raised. The longest elapsed time response
was probably when I was on Easter/Passover vacation. Haven't I
been totally truthful in these negotiations? Please give me some
examples of how I've been unreasonable? That way I can have a better
understanding of your meaning and hopefully be able to correct it.
If you have no examples then, I suggest you not imply I'm being
unreasonable, Mr. Rotbard.

It appears to me, if we tried to really evaluate which of our two
parties have been less reasonable, you would come up with the short
end of the straw due to on-line gloating contrary to your apparent
assurance and agreement with Baz and the apparent false statement you
made about accreditation in a recent post and then you ignoring my
protests. Also, only allowing three days to respond to your first
email still seems completely unreasonable to me. The whole concept of
not being able to name an alma mater seems unreasonable. I question
whether or not your party has been negotiating in good faith all
along. I could go on but, it wouldn't be very conducive to resolving
any real issues that we should be dealing with, right now?

<snip stuff to protect the privacy of others>

Derek, has called me plenty of names, probably more than I have flung
his way. I'm not out to villify Derek. Derek does that on his own.
You should review some of the things Derek has posted on-line.

Here's how Derek responded when Jim had the "audacity" to respond
with a "yawn" to Derek.

----------------inserted post from 8/6/97--------------------------
Subject: Re: BC3K demo on PC Games cd-rom
From: dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart)
Date: 1997/08/06
Message-ID: <33e9f2f4....@netnews.worldnet.att.net>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,alt.games.bc3000ad

On Tue, 05 Aug 1997 17:26:54 -0700, Jim <j...@whocares.com> wrote:

>Derek Smart wrote:
>>
>> A demo of BC3K is on the September issue of PC Games.
>
>yawn...

1. Unzips pants
2. Pees in Jim's mouth
3. Closes pants
4. Jim swallows.
5. Jim shuts up.
6. Mission Accomplished.

Derek Smart, Ph.D.
------------------end of inserted post---------------------------

I believe there is nothing that anyone else has ever said about Derek
that could villify him more than his own words. There are many other
examples of Derek's words that I can present. If you want, we can get
into more detail, as to who is villifying who. Derek is the center of
this flame-fest because of the things HE, a public figure, a game
developer in a game news group, has said, NOT because of anything I
or anyone else has said. This is a fact that seems to continue to
elude Mr. Smart and possibly you. If he could somehow clean up his
act then, it would all eventually stop. He could save himself a lot
of aggravation as well as some legal fees. Of course, I as well as
probably dozens more have already told Derek this on many many
occasions.

<snip stuff to protect the privacy of others>

This was one of the issues that I responded to and tried to address
earlier. This was some other of my points that you chose to ignore.
I assumed that you chose to ignore these because it would be irrelevent
since, you seemed to be fully confident that you could prove that Derek
had earned a PhD at an accredited college at the time and I would take
my web page down. This would seem to make this issue totally irrelevent.
Now you bring it up again. Rather than recopying stuff out of my old
emails, there was the statement I paraphrased out of "The Oxford
Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States" (1992). I'll just
present the exact quote for you.

"In Gertz v. Robert I Welch (1974), the Court established that the First
Amendment required that public figures--persons with widespread fame or
notoriety and persons who had injected themselves into the debate about
a public controversy for the purposes of influencing the resolution of
the issue involved--also had to prove knowing falsehood or reckless
disregard to win their libel suits. The Court's decisions requiring public
officials and public figures to prove knowing falsehood or reckless
disregard for the truth has created a barrier to winning libel suits that
few have been able to surmount."

Of course, if it turns out that Derek's alma mater is not accredited
then the case would probably never even get to the point of discussing
Gertz v. Welch, since my web page argues that Derek never earned a degree
from an accredited college and Derek has claimed his college was in fact
accredited. And, it could be argued that this in and of itself is fraud.

Mr. Rotbard, should we continue discussing the potential court case,
which you keep bringing up then NOT discussing (maybe because your case
looks very weak to me). Or, should we discuss taking down the web page?
If you do bring it up again then, I leave you with a standing request
to address the points I've presented here and previously at the same
time you bring it up.

<snip stuff to protect the privacy of others>

Mr. Rotbard, I offer to take down the web page once again. Are you
really unclear about how easy I'm trying to make this? If so please
let me know. From my perspective ALL of the loose ends are on
your side. All of the unclear issues are in your court, and have
been for a long time, Mr. Rotbard.
1. Will Mr. Curran be the third party? The ball's in your court.
2. Is accreditation validation acceptable? The ball's in your court.
3. When could this actually start taking place? The ball's in your court.

At the beginning of your post you say "I can prove Derek's Ph.D. any
time I wish by revealing this information." So, what's stopping you?

I have no idea why you're stalling and ignoring the real issues that
are not yet resolved, unless Mr. Smart's PhD is bogus and you're just
trying to "scare" me into capitulation. I had apparently assumed
incorrectly that you had given up trying to "scare" me into
capitulation and were fading away. Maybe some good will come of it
and you will finally address your open issues and we can move to
quickly conclude this affair.

<snip stuff to protect the privacy of others>

Sincerely,

Bill Huffman

--------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Dan Brooks" <comput...@msn.com>
To: <bill.h...@sparc.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM>
Subject: New page
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 1998 10:03:11 -0500

<snip snide comments to protect Dan's privacy>

Dan Brooks
________________________
Computer Rescue
St. Louis, MO

Eric Evans

unread,
May 22, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/22/98
to

Ouch! That's some of your best work ever, Bill!

In article <6k49cc$t0t$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com
wrote:

>
>Actually, I think what might have happened is the con artist that Derek
>got his PhD from in England kept making spelling corrections to Derek's
>thesis. Derek had mistakenly placed his thesis in the one-way-frame early.
>So, he had to keep sending the whole thesis (both pages) and the two
>frames (one for each page) back and forth to England. The mail expenses
>added up and maybe the con artist charged by the pound also. (after all,
>he is in England where they usually do charge by the pound) It all added
>up to lot's of pounds then, when derek converted it to dollars he messed
>up the arithmetic and missed the placement of the decimal point by an
>order of magnitude or two.
>

Jimmy Chan

unread,
May 22, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/22/98
to

lholt (lh...@es.atl.sita.intXXX) wrote:
:#Hey Jimmy,

:#Could you conceive of someone being motivated by something other than
:#real money?

For someone like DS? No.

Given DS's past history and his claims to fame, everything he is doing is
motivated by his greed and his high opinion of himself.

--
==============================ji...@hawaii.edu===============================

Bill Huffman

unread,
May 22, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/22/98
to

In article <356582...@TennetNOSPAMMERS.COM>,

JackyO <JJ...@TennetNOSPAMMERS.COM> wrote:
>bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com wrote:
>>
>> In article <3562F0...@TennetNOSPAMMERS.COM>,
>> JJ...@TennetNOSPAMMERS.COM wrote:
>>
>> > So whatever happened? Where does this all stand?
>>
>> By now you've probably seen Part 6. I'm just collecting together
>> the exchanges and posting them as a new Part. I'm currently working
>> on Part 7. I'm guessing that I'll be done at Part 8.
>>
>> Where does it all stand? Good question, according to the last
>> Bashers for Justice edition, I had to change my shoes after Derek's
>> visit. According to Derek, (here's a teaser) he's going to destroy me.
>> Period. And I won't be able to make it up to him by washing his car
>> because I'm not worthy enough of a human being to even do that. And,
>> the lawsuit is being filed. (There really is some good stuff that I
>> don't plan on making public without Derek's permission. However, I give
>> my permission to Derek to post any and all of the correspondence that
>> took place. I've just decided it best that I maintain the moral high
>> ground and not post other people's email to me, without permission or,
>> as evidence to correct any false statement that might be made.)
>>
>> After all of the "Parts" are posted, I think you'll be in as good a
>> position as anyone to decide where things stand. (except of course for
>> Derek, his lawyer and probably Dan Brooks who knows what's going on)
>>
>>
>
>Ok, thanks for the heads-up. What happened to Dan Brooks, anyway? Last I
>remember, you two were slugging it out over dates and 'incompetencies'.

Your guess is as good as mine. Last 4 emails from Dan were "demands" that
I remove his name from my web page. I kept telling him that if he asked
nicely I would remove his name. He kept responding back that I was
playing a silly game and once again "demanding" that I remove his name.
It was actually kind of fun. I felt like a parent trying to teach a
kid in his terrible twos to say please when all the kid really needed
was a nap. However, I do admit to taking a jab in my first response. :-)

note: I just love this and had to include it in my first response.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: (BC3K) Derek Smart Threatens Legal Action...Again <yawn>
From: "Dan Brooks" <comput...@msn.com>
Date: 1998/03/17
....snip...
But think about it, ribo. You believe a lawyer would pursue this course
if at were all a charade? That the lawyer is not intimately aware of the
existance of the PhD? If this does anything, it helps to establish the
credibility of the PhD.
--------------------------------------------------------------

>Maybe Derek called them <the three of them - Ballinger, Muller, and
>Brooks> off in the hope of this thing finally going away?

Multiple times, Derek had said he had done this. I think you are
likely correct and Derek was either more convincing or he really
did it this time.

>Also, have you had ANY further correspondence from Mr. Rotbard, Internet
>Attorney Extraordinaire?

The last correspondence is in the final Part 8. I'm almost done with it
so, I'd guess it will be posted on Monday.

Talking to a lawyer, he said that if Derek does file he will likely
file in federal court here in San Diego. That being the case, it would
be cheapest for Derek to get another attorney in the area to handle
the case. Even if Derek is successful in getting it filed in N.Y. or
Fl. then, he thought I would still have an excellent chance at getting
it moved to San Diego, anyway. So, it appears unlikely that we'll be
seeing anymore of Mr. Rotbard. It would be really great if he found
someone named Mr. Lyon from Moore, Lyon & Lyon or something like
that so that it would make the next satire more fun. :-)

bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com

unread,
May 26, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/26/98
to

Part 8 in Derek's attempt to squelch the truth and free speech
by threatening a lawsuit, covers the last period in the negotiations.
It appears that all that was left is the obligatory school yard bully
threats and profanity from Mr. Smart and the final threats from
Mr. Rotbard.
April 26 - 27, 1998

interesting note: Mr. Rotbard has still never denied that Derek's
"alma mater" was one of the 69 bogus scams listed in Chapter 25.

humorous note: This last email from Mr. Rotbard is the first and
only time that he referred to Derek as "Dr." in all of our exchanges.

privacy note: I've been using <> to enclose my summary of what
Derek's or Eric's email said. This is to protect Derek's privacy. I
decided it would be best to stay on the moral high ground and not
break netiquette and post private emails. However, Derek (or Dan)
has my complete permission to post any of my emails and/or their
emails.

EPILOGUE note: Please don't miss the epilogue statement that is
attached to the end of this post.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 1998 17:12:55 -0400
To: rot...@ix.netcom.com
From: Derek Smart <dsm...@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: So, we're still in negotiations?]
Cc: huf...@sparc.sandiegoca.ncr.com

<Derek makes some very serious threats and does some heavy duty
name calling (even by Derek standards), directed at me.>

----------------------------------------------------------------

From huffman Mon Apr 27 15:51:20 1998
Subject: Re: [Fwd: So, we're still in negotiations?] (fwd)
To: rot...@ix.netcom
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 15:51:20 -0700 (PDT)

Dear Eric Rotbard,

I wasn't sure what to make of an email Mr. Smart recently sent.

It seems that he is threatening possible illegal action against
me with his statement, "I WANT to teach Huffman a lesson and
NOTHING is going to stop me from doing it." and his statement
"I'm only interested in destroying him. Period." This could
very easily be interpreted to mean that not even the law is going
to stop him and he doesn't even care if he goes to prison as
long as he destroys me.

I would like to warn you that that would be ill advised. If anything
happens to me in the next few months, I'll make sure the police are
made aware of this threat. No matter what happens to me or my family.

Hopefully, Mr. Smart just lost his cool temporarily and has just
overstated his intent.

I don't understand what Mr. Smart meant when he said that "you are
encouraging Huffman into thinking he can get away with the farce".
Mr. Rotbard, I'm not trying to get away with anything? If this was
all triggered by Mr. Smart's "alma mater" being listed in Chapter
25 of Dr. Bear's book then, I could see why Mr. Smart might be
disappointed. It would mean that he was probably conned and could
have lost a substantial sum of money. However, that wouldn't be my
fault? But, even in that case, I might still be interested in some
alternative solutions to satisfy what I understood your main goal to
be. That is, to get the web site taken down. Of course, if your main
goal has changed, as Mr. Smart says below, to getting me at all costs
then, I would find it extremely difficult trying to cooperate with
you on that one, Mr. Rotbard. :-)

<I was willing to take down my web page if Derek was willing to
make public the cover name of his diploma con artist, i.e., the name
of his alma mater. I'm just interested in the truth prevailing.>

I find it difficult to see how we will be able to come to terms with
email like Mr. Smart's being sent. To me, it just seems to be another
indication of your party's lack of desire to negotiate in good faith.

Mr. Rotbard, if I don't hear from you within the next very few days
then, I'll assume that my hopes that Mr. Smart just temporarily lost
his cool and overstated his intent was incorrect and that he was
indeed threatening action that would be illegal.

Sincerely,
Bill Huffman

<snip partial copy of Derek's email to protect his privacy.>

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 27 Apr 1998 22:29:19 -0400


From: Eric Rotbard <rot...@ix.netcom.com>
To: Bill Huffman <huf...@sparc.sandiegoca.ncr.com>

Subject: Re: [Fwd: So, we're still in negotiations?] (fwd)

Bill Huffman wrote:
>
> Dear Eric Rotbard,
>
> I wasn't sure what to make of an email Mr. Smart recently sent.
>
> It seems that he is threatening possible illegal action against
> me with his statement, "I WANT to teach Huffman a lesson and
> NOTHING is going to stop me from doing it." and his statement
> "I'm only interested in destroying him. Period." This could
> very easily be interpreted to mean that not even the law is going
> to stop him and he doesn't even care if he goes to prison as
> long as he destroys me.
>
> I would like to warn you that that would be ill advised. If anything
> happens to me in the next few months, I'll make sure the police are
> made aware of this threat. No matter what happens to me or my family.
>
> Hopefully, Mr. Smart just lost his cool temporarily and has just
> overstated his intent.


<Eric says that Derek was referring to legal action.>
<Ya right, like Eric would say anything different even if
Derek had asked him if he knew of a hit man that liked
to travel. :-o >


> I don't understand what Mr. Smart meant when he said that "you are
> encouraging Huffman into thinking he can get away with the farce".
> Mr. Rotbard, I'm not trying to get away with anything? If this was
> all triggered by Mr. Smart's "alma mater" being listed in Chapter
> 25 of Dr. Bear's book then, I could see why Mr. Smart might be
> disappointed. It would mean that he was probably conned and could
> have lost a substantial sum of money. However, that wouldn't be my
> fault? But, even in that case, I might still be interested in some
> alternative solutions to satisfy what I understood your main goal to
> be. That is, to get the web site taken down. Of course, if your main
> goal has changed, as Mr. Smart says below, to getting me at all costs
> then, I would find it extremely difficult trying to cooperate with
> you on that one, Mr. Rotbard. :-)
>
> I find it difficult to see how we will be able to come to terms with
> email like Mr. Smart's being sent. To me, it just seems to be another
> indication of your party's lack of desire to negotiate in good faith.
>
> Mr. Rotbard, if I don't hear from you within the next very few days
> then, I'll assume that my hopes that Mr. Smart just temporarily lost
> his cool and overstated his intent was incorrect and that he was
> indeed threatening action that would be illegal.
>
> Sincerely,
> Bill Huffman

<Eric says that even though I don't believe it, Dr. Smart's PhD is
bona fide. He warns that unless I drop the PhD issue and take down
my web page, he will pursue litigation. Derek is no longer interested
in a settlement based upon third-party confirmation.>

Sincerely,

Eric Rotbard

Sincerely,

Eric Rotbard

----------------------------------------------------------------
So why did Derek renege on the agreement that would have taken down
my web page? I can think of only one reasonable explanation, Derek
is a PhD fraud.

Epilogue in Derek's attempt to squelch the truth and free speech
by threatening a lawsuit. I have been asked this question by many,
why don't you just take the web page down? I've asked myself this
question. It was kind of funny in my phone conversation with
Derek, he was at one point pleading with me to be "sane and
reasonable".

Derek's words were something like,
Bill, this is just a game to you. This is my reputation! You have
absolutely nothing to gain and everything to lose! I have everything
to gain and little to lose by pushing this lawsuit. It doesn't make
any sense for you to continue, when there's a threat of a lawsuit
hanging over your head. Why don't you just do us both a big favor
and take down your web page?

Well, it's a good question that I think deserves the best answer
I can give. On the one hand, Derek made more sense than he ever
had before. But on the other, I thought that was probably his
exact thoughts when he decided to make his lawsuit threats and it
just made me more determined that the truth should prevail. I'm
totally convinced that Derek is a PhD fraud. Why should I allow a
man to come into this newsgroup and insult my fellow gamers and
me, and make a total mockery of the truth? I have what many might
consider a naive faith in the truth. I believe that the truth should
prevail. If you haven't done anything wrong, the truth should even
prevail in a court of law. If the truth doesn't prevail in court
then, it means that something went wrong with the law, not that I've
done something wrong. If we let bullies and liars corrupt the truth
for their own gain then, it is our loss.

Please note that I'm not trying to claim I did this all by myself
because, I didn't. I would like to thank:
1)Fthx, (whoever, he is :-) he also stood up to Derek's bully tactics.
2)The on-line support from everyone was very much appreciated.
3)The huge number of emails was very surprising and very much
appreciated, especially, the many offers of financial assistance. I
really doubt that I'm going to require it at this point but, when I
felt most alone and vulnerable, it really raised my spirits to know
that so many other people were also disturbed by Derek's tactics and
were even willing to pledge some of their hard earned wages. This was
all without me even asking! I thank you.

Expect a new version of the web page very soon. It has a new firmly
established FACT 4 that leads even more convincingly to the
inescapable conclusion that Derek is a PhD fraud. Can you guess what
FACT 4 might be? ;-) http://www.angelfire.com/ca/PhDFraud

Message has been deleted

WLambrukos

unread,
May 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/27/98
to

>It seems that he is threatening possible illegal action against
>me with his statement, "I WANT to teach Huffman a lesson and
>NOTHING is going to stop me from doing it." and his statement
>"I'm only interested in destroying him. Period." This could
>very easily be interpreted to mean that not even the law is going
>to stop him and he doesn't even

>care if he goes to prison as
>long as he destroys me.<<

I am reminded of the time MANY years ago when I girl I knew stole a woman's
pumpkins at Halloween. The woman discovered who did it then grabbed the girl
at work the next day as soon as she saw her and they started to fight, during
which the woman yelled, "I'll kill you".

The next day the woman filed charges against the girl for the theft of the
pumpkins. The girl contacted an attorney, who immediately filed attempted
murder charges against the woman because of her actions and threats. The woman
dropped her charges. Bill, sounds like you should be talking to an attorney!

Bill

Typhon

unread,
May 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/27/98
to

Derek Smart wrote in message <6khbog$b...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>...
>On 27 May 1998 00:36:49 GMT, wlamb...@aol.com (WLambrukos) wrote:

>>When you jump in a flame war and insult someone, you deserve what you get
and I
>>don't give a shit who's watching, listening or reading; I do what I WANT
to do and >>NOTHING and NOBODY can censor me but me.

Gee, Derek, would that you thought that way about OTHER people's rights to
opinions and commentaries. No one can censor you but you, but you can of
course censor anyone who expresses believes, ideas, or suppositions about
you which you don't like. You do what you WANT to do, but God help anyone
else who does what THEY want to do, if you don't like it.

Still the same old con-man, dirt-bag, egotistical pig as always. The idea
that any of these guys could possibly hurt your reputation is silly. It's
like Hitler, sitting around in hell, worrying that some new history book
will hurt his reputation. There is nothing left to hurt.

And, by the way, BC3K STILL sucks. Got the magazine CD, applied the 3DFX
beta patch. Still crashes a lot, graphics still blow, interface is still
horrible, still buggy. Take a good look at I-WAR. That's how a starship
simulation should look and feel.

Bill Huffman

unread,
May 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/27/98
to

In article <199805270036...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,

WLambrukos <wlamb...@aol.com> wrote:
>>It seems that he is threatening possible illegal action against
>>me with his statement, "I WANT to teach Huffman a lesson and
>>NOTHING is going to stop me from doing it." and his statement
>>"I'm only interested in destroying him. Period." This could
>>very easily be interpreted to mean that not even the law is going
>>to stop him and he doesn't even
>
>>care if he goes to prison as
>>long as he destroys me.<<
>
>I am reminded of the time MANY years ago when I girl I knew stole a woman's
>pumpkins at Halloween. The woman discovered who did it then grabbed the girl
>at work the next day as soon as she saw her and they started to fight, during
>which the woman yelled, "I'll kill you".
>
>The next day the woman filed charges against the girl for the theft of the
>pumpkins. The girl contacted an attorney, who immediately filed attempted
>murder charges against the woman because of her actions and threats. The woman
>dropped her charges. Bill, sounds like you should be talking to an attorney!
>

Maybe I will. There also was the "meet me in Atlanta" incident and the
"bitch slap" incident just to name a couple of very recent on-line
threats from Mr. Smart. If Mr. Smart actually does file his frivolous
case then, I'm sure these incidents will make for some interesting
discussions.

Gary Hladik

unread,
May 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/27/98
to

dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) writes:

[snip response to Bill Huffman post]

>Since early 1997, he has continued this farce. Certain information was made
>available to him in last minute discussions and his stance has gone from "...he
>has no Ph.D" to "...his Ph.D. is not from an accredited school"

FYI, as I pointed out in a recent post (04/22), a quick search of DejaNews
reveals that Mr. Huffman brought up the accreditation issue as early as
August, 1997, if not before.

Not a flame, just a friendly public service message from Pedantics 'R' Us.
:-)

Gary

PJL

unread,
May 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/27/98
to


Bill Huffman <huf...@news.SanDiegoCA.ATTGIS.COM> wrote in article
<6khgd7$r...@si611.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM>...


> In article <199805270036...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
> WLambrukos <wlamb...@aol.com> wrote:

> >>It seems that he is threatening possible illegal action against
> >>me with his statement, "I WANT to teach Huffman a lesson and
> >>NOTHING is going to stop me from doing it." and his statement
> >>"I'm only interested in destroying him. Period." This could
> >>very easily be interpreted to mean that not even the law is going
> >>to stop him and he doesn't even
> >
> >>care if he goes to prison as
> >>long as he destroys me.<<
> >

> >I am reminded of the time MANY years ago when I girl I knew stole a
woman's
> >pumpkins at Halloween. The woman discovered who did it then grabbed the
girl
> >at work the next day as soon as she saw her and they started to fight,
during
> >which the woman yelled, "I'll kill you".
> >
> >The next day the woman filed charges against the girl for the theft of
the
> >pumpkins. The girl contacted an attorney, who immediately filed
attempted
> >murder charges against the woman because of her actions and threats.
The woman
> >dropped her charges. Bill, sounds like you should be talking to an
attorney!
> >
>
> Maybe I will. There also was the "meet me in Atlanta" incident and the
> "bitch slap" incident just to name a couple of very recent on-line
> threats from Mr. Smart. If Mr. Smart actually does file his frivolous
> case then, I'm sure these incidents will make for some interesting
> discussions.
>

At least get a lawyer to send a cease and desist email!
We all know how well that works!


--
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Pat Lundrigan
///////////////

Message has been deleted

Derek Smart

unread,
May 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/27/98
to

On Wed, 27 May 1998 10:18:18 -0700, "Typhon" <Typ...@sprintmail.com> wrote:

<snipped some choice insults>

>And, by the way, BC3K STILL sucks.

By your standards, I can live with that. Considering you're one of very few,
I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. If you think it sucks, so be it.

>Got the magazine CD, applied the 3DFX beta patch.

Got that far huh?

>Still crashes a lot

If you don't know how to configure your system to run it or you run it on a
meagre system, what do you expect? I have HUNDREDS of email from people who
are playing that _same_ version worldwide. Problems with crashing range from
insufficient memory to incorrect WIN95 configurations.

>graphics still blow,

...excuse me while I laugh at that one LOL!...there, I feel better now.

>interface is still horrible

If you 'read' the manual, the interface becomes second nature because it's
segmented into usable systems each with a specific function. You can't expect
to learn the game in an hour especially if you are bent on slamming it.

>still buggy.

Like every game, it's got bugs. If I don't know about it, I can't fix it.

>Take a good look at I-WAR. That's how a starship
>simulation should look and feel.

I love I-War! I hate to burst your bubble though...different game, different
premise. You're comparing apples to oranges for the sake of supporting your
insults. Why not compare it to, say, Star Fleet Academy, Descent FreeSpace,
WC-IV etc?

btw, I see you changed your email address again. STOP dodging my ignore filter!

=========

>Received: from growl.pobox.com ([208.210.124.27])
> by mtiwgwc03.worldnet.att.net (Intermail v3.1 117 241) with ESMTP
> id <19980527045...@growl.pobox.com>
> for <derek...@worldnet.att.net>;
> Wed, 27 May 1998 04:53:15 +0000
>Received: (from daemon@localhost)
> by growl.pobox.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id AAA17572
> for derek...@worldnet.att.net.filterdone; Wed, 27 May 1998 00:53:15 -0400 (EDT)
>Received: from paris.akorn.net (paris.akorn.net [205.217.100.5])
> by growl.pobox.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA07370
> for <dsm...@pobox.com>; Wed, 27 May 1998 00:53:14 -0400 (EDT)
>Received: from gull.prod.itd.earthlink.net (gull.prod.itd.earthlink.net [207.217.120.85]) by paris.akorn.net (8.8.5/8.7.3)
>with ESMTP id AAA14067 for <sup...@3000ad.com>; Wed, 27 May 1998 00:53:13 -0400 (EDT)
>Received: from aol.com (1Cust107.tnt13.sfo3.da.uu.net [153.37.36.107])
> by gull.prod.itd.earthlink.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA22897
> for <sup...@3000ad.com>; Tue, 26 May 1998 21:53:11 -0700 (PDT)
>Message-ID: <356B3973...@aol.com>
>Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 21:51:47 +0000
>From: Carl Lionberger <CENSORED>
>Reply-To:
>Organization: Admin Kit Investigator
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I)
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: sup...@3000ad.com
>Subject: Battle cruiser 3000 is great!!
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Please get this to Derek Smart somehow...
>
> I just bought the latest issue of Computer Games, which had a CD
>magazine enclosed, which included the free version of Battlecruiser 3000
>AD. This game is simply incredible. I, myself, have never played the
>original, but if it's half as good, I'd still enjoy it a great deal. Of
>course, I'm still working on figuring it out, but that sort of goes to
>show how detailed, complex, and intricate the game really is. Then again
>I AM 11 years old, but I still think that the average gamer would have a
>tough time figuring it out. And, in conclusion, I hope that your future
>release of it is a considerable success.

==============

>Received: from growl.pobox.com ([208.210.124.27])
> by mtiwgwc01.worldnet.att.net (Intermail v3.1 117 241) with ESMTP
> id <19980525021...@growl.pobox.com>
> for <derek...@worldnet.att.net>;
> Mon, 25 May 1998 02:15:20 +0000
>Received: (from daemon@localhost)
> by growl.pobox.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id WAA22188
> for derek...@worldnet.att.net.filterdone; Sun, 24 May 1998 22:15:20 -0400 (EDT)
>Received: from mail1.realtime.net (mail1.realtime.net [205.238.128.217])
> by growl.pobox.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id WAA15929
> for <dsm...@pobox.com>; Sun, 24 May 1998 22:15:19 -0400 (EDT)
>Received: (qmail 20576 invoked from network); 25 May 1998 02:15:18 -0000
>Received: from zoom.realtime.net (HELO zoom.bga.com) (ro...@205.238.128.40)
> by mail1.realtime.net with SMTP; 25 May 1998 02:15:18 -0000
>Received: from big-lu (apm7-220.realtime.net [204.96.0.220]) by zoom.bga.com (8.6.12/8.6.12)
>with SMTP id VAA07839 for <dsm...@pobox.com>; Sun, 24 May 1998 21:15:14 -0500
>Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.1998052...@pop.bga.com>
>X-Sender: tin...@pop.bga.com (Unverified)
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.3 (32)
>Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 21:15:21 -0500
>To: dsm...@pobox.com
>From: Nathan Tinnin <CENSORED>
>Subject: General Stuff
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>Dr. Smart,
>
>By the way, I'm sure you get this all the time, but you're not any relation
>to Maxwell Smart are you?
>
>You take a lot of flak on the net, but I just got B3: it's too cool. At
>40 with games from Pong to Zork to Q2 through my wash, I have to say that
>B3 is really fun. Thanks.
>
>I liked your comments about Unreal. They were unbiased and reasonable. If
>I buy the game, it's on your recommendation. Keep up the good work.

===========


>Received: from growl.pobox.com ([208.210.124.27])
>by mtiwgwc02.worldnet.att.net (Intermail v3.1 117 241) with ESMTP
>id <199805231753...@growl.pobox.com>
>for ;
>Sat, 23 May 1998 17:53:25 +0000
>Received: (from daemon@localhost)
>by growl.pobox.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) id NAA29821
>for derek...@worldnet.att.net.filterdone; Sat, 23 May 1998 13:53:25 -0400 (EDT)
>Received: from paris.akorn.net (paris.akorn.net [205.217.100.5])
>by growl.pobox.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA19325
>for ; Sat, 23 May 1998 13:53:24 -0400 (EDT)
>Received: from svr-a-03.core.theplanet.net (svr-a-03.core.theplanet.net [194.152.64.45]) by paris.akorn.net (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA00264 for ; Sat, 23 May 1998 13:53:22 -0400 (EDT)
>Received: from modem93.krycek.kingston-internet.net ([195.92.235.221] helo=karoem8m)
>by svr-a-03.core.theplanet.net with esmtp (Exim 1.92p5 #1)
>for sup...@3000ad.com
>id 0ydITw-0003kb-00; Sat, 23 May 1998 18:53:21 +0100
>Message-ID: <001001bd8673$a41a7400$ddeb5cc3@karoem8m>
>From: "Paul Keith Collins"
>To:
>Subject: BattleCruiser 3000AD
>Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 18:51:02 +0100
>.MIME-Version: 1.0 .
>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01BD867B.BBA69D80"
>X-Priority: 3
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
>
>Hello,
> I have lust recently connected to the Internet and i am very pleased to find this site related to BC3000AD.
>
>I have had BC3000AD since it was released by GameTek and i was surprised to read in the Manual that i
>downloaded from this site that the Version 1 of BC3000AD was incomplete as i found it to be a very enjoyable
>program which i admit i play at least Four times a week for around Three Hours at a time.
>
>I downloaded the patch of v1.07DC and the difference is amazing and i look forward to the release of your latest endeavour BattleCruiser3020AD.
>
>All the best for your work and may i say. I hope things go much more smoothly for you this time.
>
>Best Wishes.
================

Derek Smart, Ph.D.
Designer/Lead Developer
Battlecruiser:3000AD

"The man who follows the crowd will usually get no further
than the crowd. The man who walks alone is likely to find
himself in places no one has ever been."

ICQ : 158435
Email : mailto:dsm...@pobox.com
Media Contact : mailto:bc3000a...@mindspring.com
World Wide Web : www.bc3000ad.com
BC3K Latest News : www.bc3000ad.com/temp/gnn.html
Active Worlds : Teleport to GALCOM at www.activeworlds.com

Derek Smart

unread,
May 27, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/27/98
to

You're quite right Gary

It started with this post..and reading the others, you will see Huffman has
been on my case as far back as 1996. Yes, we have an entire folder of this
stuff.

======================

On Mon, 25 Aug 1997 19:11:43 -0600, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com wrote:

>
>
>On 1997/08/09, dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) wrote
>>On Fri, 08 Aug 1997 16:34:11 -0600, bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com wrote:
>
>>>In article <33ec2171...@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
>>> dsm...@pobox.com wrote:
>>>
>…. Snip
>>>
>>>> Shut up Stuart, no-one was talking to you. And you can keep your
>>>> Masturbation 101 manual to yourself.
>>>
>>>Derek, you really seem to have masturbation on your mind lately. What's
>>>the matter? Did your girl friend (if she ever really existed) finally
>>>figure out what a self centered loser you are? Or, is it just dawning on
>>>you that BC3K was nothing more than a fantasy in your mind that you've
>>>just been masturbating about for over 8 years now?
>>
>>>P.S., Derek, show me up and tell me what school you got your PhD at. I'm
>>>saying here and now that that is probably a lie also. Now is your big
>>>chance to show me up Derek, you habitual liar.
>>
>>>P.P.S. Please include the year you graduated with the PhD so that it can
>>>be verified, liar.
>… snip …
>>This is EXACTLY what I wanted.
>
>Well, congratulations. I hope you're pleased.
>
>… snip …
>
>>Now, if you were to wager your 12 months salary (which shouldn't be much), and
>>we can get someone we trust to cash the checks, I can easily take you up on the
>>qualification theory. In fact, better yet, we'll do 6 months salary for EVERY
>>degree I have (all 3 of them). I will need you to send the mediator your last
>>pay stub to verify your income. I get to chose who and I suspect that it will
>>be a member of the press I trust or my attorney. Now, YOU show ME up, please.
>
>>Even if you lose the bet, I know you have bills to pay, so I am willing to take
>>a garnishment for 50% of your salary until the lost bet is paid up. My web site
>>recently signed up to accept credit cards (the link will be up shortly) since I
>>will be selling Battlecruiser Commander directly as well, therefore, I can also
>>take a credit card. In my case, I will submit a certified check for my end of
>>the bet.
>
>Derek, here was my reaction. As visions of huge amounts of cash in my
>bank account were dancing through my mind, I become concerned about
>giving a possible sociopath my family's address (someone with fantasies
>about breaking ribs and urinating in mouths is a possible sociopath).
>The vast amounts of cash quickly overcame this concern (after all you're
>on the other side of the country). However, after further reflection the
>possibility of actually collecting a dime from an illegal agreement
>(gambling is not legal in either of our states) from a habitual liar who
>could not keep a legal binding agreement with three different software
>publishers would be close to impossible.
>
>My conclusion is that this is really nothing more than a desparate
>attempt on your part to deflect the real issue. The real issue is that
>Derek Smart is a habitual liar. The crowning proof of this is that Derek
>Smart does not even have a PhD. Derek Smart has claimed a PhD in every
>post he has ever made. Therefore, Derek Smart is a habitual liar.
>
>Evidence? Many lies have already been documented. For example, Derek's
>statement months a go that the manual was complete. The crowning evidence
>of the habitual part of "habitual liar" is of course the PhD issue.
>Derek has been unusually silent over the past year whenever anyone has
>asked details about his PhD. I have never seen anyone else being
>reluctant to discuss what university or college they went too, especially
>when it was an advanced degree.
>
>>I await your decision. Perhaps you can get the other detractors here to help
>>you with the bet. Ask Mark Asher, fthx and his girlfriend, Jon Normington as
>>well. I can't think of the others because they all seem to have faded into
>>obscurity lately.
>
>Tell you what Derek. I will promise to never again post an article to a
>Derek Smart or a Battle Cruiser thread again if your PhD is confirmed.
>My last Derek Smart post would be a public apology for calling you a
>habitual liar. I will then join the silent majority who just read and
>laugh. On the other hand, if your PhD proves to be bogus, meaning
>nonexistent or a bullshit degree (e.g., PhD in Theology from the Miami
>Beach Bible College) then, you may only post announcements or answer
>questions on game play. No cuss words or unpleasant posts or flames will
>be posted by Derek Smart, only professional responses. It would be in
>your best interest to behave like that anyway. Therefore, I'm adding an
>additional stipulation, you shall change your sig to say Derek Smart,
>Ph.D. NOT!
>
>I await your decision.
>
>>I am sending you a copy of this via e-mail so you get it faster than your news
>>server.
>
>Further evidence that Derek is a habitual liar. This was not in my mail
>box when I got back from vacation.
>
>Note: I've made the correction to the first line of Derek's sig.
>
>>Derek Smart, Ph.D. NOT!
>
>-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet


On Fri, 08 Aug 1997 16:34:11 -0600, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com wrote:

>In article <33ec2171...@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
> dsm...@pobox.com wrote:
>>
>> On 6 Aug 1997 13:19:16 GMT, stu...@banana.psd.com.au (Stuart Park) wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >I'm helping a couple of people at my workplace finish a manual
>> >this month.. maybe I should send Derek a copy to let him see
>> >what a completed manual looks like.
>>
>> Shut up Stuart, no-one was talking to you. And you can keep your
>> Masturbation 101 manual to yourself.
>
>Derek, you really seem to have masturbation on your mind lately. What's
>the matter? Did your girl friend (if she ever really existed) finally
>figure out what a self centered loser you are? Or, is it just dawning on
>you that BC3K was nothing more than a fantasy in your mind that you've
>been masturbating over for 8 years now?
>
>P.S., Derek, show me up and tell me what school you got your PhD at. I'm
>saying here and now that that is probably a lie also. Now is your big
>chance to show me up Derek, you habitual liar.
>
>P.P.S. Please include the year you graduated with the PhD so that it can
>be verified, liar.
>
>P.P.P.S. Derek if you took the above statements personally then you're
>correct I was getting personal. :-)
>
>P.P.P.P.S. Show me up Derek, I dare you.
>>
>> Derek Smart, Ph.D.
>
>-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet

On 28 Jul 1997 09:25:06 -0700, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
huf...@news.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM (Bill Huffman) wrote:

>In article <33DA9A...@together.net>,
>John Beaderstadt <beady....@together.net> wrote:
>>Derek Smart wrote:
>>
>>> Most of the 'important' stuff goes on at www.bc3000ad.com where it belongs.
>>
>>It's been a couple of months since I looked in on these threads. In that
>>time several famous actors have died, a serial killer comitted suicide,
>>we had an outstandingly successful landing on Mars, Hong Kong reverted
>>to the Chinese, The USS Constitution sailed under her own power for the
>>first time in over a century, NATO was enlarged, my son came home on
>>leave from the Army and I got a raise at work. Now I learn that "Most of
>>the 'important' stuff goes on at www.bc3000ad.com where it belongs."
>>
>>The more things change, the more they stay the same. See you all in
>>September!
>>
>One word describes Derek's view of the world, MEGALOMANIA! He
>thinks people in general were actually interested in what he is
>doing. Like everyone would actually care whether or not BC3K was
>successful. All we were interested in is the laughing stock material
>he provided. The only personal interest in Derek was more along
>the lines of "What could that guy be thinking? How could anyone
>be so out of touch? Why would he say that and then not do it?"
>
>By the way Derek, how are you and the most gorgeous woman in the
>world doing? Have you spent another 3.5 million dollars of your
>own money on BC3030AD yet? Have you bothered doing the paper
>work to get that other cool million, yet? etc. etc. LOL

On 11 Jun 1997 09:39:55 -0700, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
huf...@news.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM (Bill Huffman) wrote:

>In article <01bc7666$1c5ba0c0$cb1067cf@ntw_quattrof>,
>Rollo the Talking Dragon <Fr...@Voicenet.com> wrote:
>>There is someone familiar with the game engine who can write a walkthrough.
>>His name is D-e-r-e-k
>>S-m-a-r-t
>>
>>FQ
>>
>>>If there isn't, is somebody familiar
>>> with the game engine consider writing one?
>>>
>
>Other people have volunteered to work on a FAQ, a walk-through, or
>even the manual. Derek has always said that only he could properly
>do the documentation.
>
>Isn't it interesting that every other computer program has or could
>have had someone besides the lead programmer write a manual? I guess
>the BC3K interface is so absolutely bad no one else besides Derek
>could understand it? Or maybe Derek is just wrong about being the
>only person that could do it? I think the answer is that the only
>thing that really matters to Derek is Derek's ego. (i.e., megalomania)

On 2 Jun 1997 14:06:35 -0700, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
huf...@news.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM (Bill Huffman) wrote:

>In article <01bc6f87$414f10a0$679e...@MarkA.impacttech.com>,
>Mark Asher <ma...@impacttech.com> wrote:
>>I think something about tangled webs applies here. Maybe we should update
>>it to:
>>
>>"O what a neural-net we weave
>> when first we practice to deceive."
>>
>>CYA, as executed by Derek, is seldom successful and always clumsy, despite
>>his massive intellect.
>>
>>Mark Asher
>>
>It's likely true that he has a massive intellect. You know what they
>say about mass. The greater the mass the harder it is to get
>it moving and once moving it's more difficult to get it to
>change directions. Also, the greater the density the greater
>the mass. Derek has proven himself quite dense and unable to
>change his direction. We've both told him he would be better
>off keeping quiet than sacrificing his reputation for everyones
>amusement.

On 19 Mar 1997 15:41:02 -0800, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
huf...@news.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM (Bill Huffman) wrote:
>Well for myself, I was thinking of buying the game. The bad reviews
>kept me from buying the game.
>
>Derek appears to be a total dumb sh*t, as*hole to me. I might
>still buy the game some day, if I ever see a good review. I don't
>really care that the designer is an ass. He is a fool and
>pompous ass that's having a nervous break down. But, the game
>concept sounds interesting and if it ever works, I might get it.
>My guess is that it will never be a good game and I'll never get it.
>
>The publicity he's getting for BC3K is all bad. Like the
>publicity Tylenol was getting a dozen or so years a go.
>
>I am amused to see Derek keep sticking his foot in his mouth.
>He is going to either be admitted to a mental hospital for
>a nervous break down or to a regular hospital for starvation
>due to lack of nutrients in his own foot. :-) So, will he
>finish the game before this occurs? Only time will tell.
>In the meantime, I read and laugh.

On 13 Dec 1996 13:43:25 -0800, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
huf...@news.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM (Bill Huffman) wrote:

>In article <58q7ua$g...@sjx-ixn6.ix.netcom.com>,
>Robert Dillmeier <dilg...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>So, what do you all think Derek's next project will be? Do you think
>>he'll use his (ahem) elite skills to program another game, or will he
>>sink quietly into the void?
>>
>>I think he should be a publicist. He'd be great for election campaigns.
>>
>>
>I seriously doubt he could get the financial backing for a new project
>from anyone. So unless he's very wealthy and doesn't care about
>being poor, the name Derek Smart will slip into oblivion. It will
>be a great loss to the humor level in this news group (similar
>to the loss stand-up comedians felt with the loss of Quayle).

On 12 Dec 1996 17:03:54 -0800, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
huf...@news.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM (Bill Huffman) wrote:

>In article <58mii1$r...@news.inforamp.net>,
>Jack Valero <jv...@inforamp.net> wrote:
>>DS may have ego problems. He may not be the coder he thinks he is.
>>And his game does seem to be a bit of a rip-off. However this
>>comment about sheep et al is really uncalled for. Will we now
>>be attacking his mother, his wife or s/o, his family? I do not
>>know DS or his game but I *do* recognize immaturity and it does
>>not seem to be limited to DS. - Jack
>
>It's so very true. How could someone insult sheep like that!

>On 13 Dec 1996 13:04:53 -0800, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
>huf...@news.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM (Bill Huffman) wrote:
>
>
>... stuff snipped ...
>
>>I think the following was from an April column:
>>
>>"Derek Smart, the designer of the near-mythical 3000AD, popped up briefly
>>in the newsgroup to deny that he had turned over any of the code to Take 2
>>for completion. Take 2 is apparently doing QA work only. Says Derek: "only
>>FOUR people have EVER seen the BC3K code and I am the ONLY one who has
>>access to all of it. Support programmers work on code modules based on
>>their areas of expertise and therefore DO NOT have access to it's
>>entirety."
>>
>To those of you out there that are not programmers. This is one
>of the most ridicules things I've ever seen. I'm sure that
>making the problem much worse is the likely fact that the interfaces
>are not well defined. A project run like this CAN NEVER WORK!
>Those of you that saved a copy of BC3K in the hopes that it would
>work someday are probably going to be disappointed. If this
>is really how the project was run then,
>1. Derek is a totally incompetent programmer and project leader.
>2. He was either too stupid or paranoid to fix the arrangement once
>the pieces weren't fitting together.
>3. Derek might be the worst person to work with in the history
>of programming!
>
>Thank you Derek for this. No matter how bad things or individuals
>ever get at my work, I'll always know that it could be much worse.

nobr...@unleesrjed.clampet

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to

On Wed, 27 May 1998 10:18:18 -0700, "Typhon" <Typ...@sprintmail.com>
wrote:

>

>horrible, still buggy. Take a good look at I-WAR. That's how a starship


>simulation should look and feel.
>

okay Sir, you have the developers ear...right here , Derek is now the
ONLY developer to post here , or anywhere for that matter , Andy, God
bless him Hollis has taken leave from the flight sim group, the poor
guy since assholes with nothing to say but, "duh your game sucks, you
suck, suck suck suck duh" have started a childish crusade aginst
him...for what i do not know, Derek has stuck both to his game and to
the roaster toasters who would flame anything from the death of
princess di , remeber that thread, to possibly any thing( possibly the
oregon killing's next?) as long as their childish need to see their
moniker on a page , is up. look we all have flamed, and i have most
certainly you bet, but that has been in response to threats to me, my
character or other insipid bs posted in response to my posts , and i
would expect honesttly that you would do the same, and Derek has you
bet done the same after all we are all justr human. But here you are
with the damn developers ear, i imagine you want to prove a point, let
me go out on a limb and present possibly your point, that derek's
product is not worth a used tampoon in a three day old unflushed
toilet, bet i got your attention with that series of adjectives, so
bruno prove that your claims are valid, prove that you
can sucker punch Derek with the reality, and provide us all ..and
importantly Derek
the reasons , times, error codes, circumstances , and situations where
these bugs occurred. If Derek is unable to solve your problem or you
have , "found him and his product out", then possibly you are an
intelligent observant individual, and not some griper who picks
imaginary bugs out of the primordial ether, look this is not a flame,
just i wish when people respond like this they respond intelligently ,
come on that is the real resaon you guys bait derek, aside from hoping
to set the guy off, and who wouldn't get set of by bs, there is not
one micron of evidence presented , in a clear technical manner to at
the least present to Derek remainig bugs, and at the worst, or rather
at what you would like to do best, shove his face into a product full
of remaining bugs that your perceive as garbage from him as you
perceive as a garbage man. sorry to get on your case, but seriously i
do not think i have said anything hostile enough to you to warrent a
flame
Joe
Death From Above Means Never Having To Say Your Sorry

nobr...@unleesrjed.clampet

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to

On 27 May 1998 20:09:17 GMT, ft...@aol.com (Fthx) wrote:

>Speaking of meeting Derek in Atlanta, the "big moment" has come at last. The
>Taco Supreme Commander is probably on his way there. Not only do his posts
>stop for a little while (at least we can hope that he doesn't have access), but
>we can watch carefully to see if j...@bsfilter.com (who was conspicuously silent
>while Derek was ranting in volume about Unreal in the action group, but came
>back briefly after K....-Smart PhD retreated) takes another "break". After
>seeing "joe" get toasted on the Panzer Commander and "abandonware" issues, I'm
>eager to see fresh evidence that Derek == "joe".
>
>But when the Taco Supreme Commander returns, the big question for most
>Derekologists will be: Manic or Depressive?
>
>fthx
>
>-----------
>[Derek Classic follows]
>
I am here baby , please do not tell me ya want me to give ya a big
kiss , i'll leave that "honor " to bill . hey i'll be checking for ya
on aol and here.
what toast about abandonware, i thought , and NO one has proven me
wrong that abandonware was legit, there are plenty of sites around
that have them , they were even advertised in THIS group which does
NOT stand for posting of pirate sites bright boy, if they are piracy
then why the heck are they still up, they all contain games that are
a. no longer supported
b. games that are no longer sold and are OVER 5 years old , and
possibly can't even be bought used
c.games around 1mb, shows how old they are
if this is piracy no one seems to care , so what the hell is YOUR
problem with this . If i was wrong fine i was wrong so who the hell is
gonna take people to court for a site somewhere that has a game from
1992 on it that is less then 1 mb in size and is not sold, or even
supported anymore . is it wrong , i do not know who is missing the
profits if the game is OUT OF PRINT
as for panzer commander i sent Rick a post about the game, file size,
version number, manual etc , , and since the game came out within 2
weeks after my old lady got it , this must have been a swiped
master/beta that was duplicated or ssi lied and had the master's ready
looong ago and this really is grey market, and seeing the posts people
are uping about pc, i am inclined to believe the later, that ssi only
sent betas out as a gratuity to there tester , consider this PC was in
stores less than 2 weeks after the beta tester got their copy, do you
think they didn't find the bugs that everyone is finding?, and do you
think ssi did not have the copies printed boxed , manual printed if
they shipped less than 2 weeks later, come on it takes longer then
that to beta test in final round, get feedback, make or at least leave
room for changes to be made in the manual to reflect changes in
programming of at least in the readme file, do not be so childish ,
ssi is full of shit. either thay or i got a pirated printed copy that
was boxed for sale, again ssi's fault. or what you propose i have the
skills /connections to hack fucking ssi to get a prerelease copy, what
am i fucking god? Even if i was , yeah right to find a pirate site and
download fucking hundreds upon hundreds of mb of a pirated game, who
would be at fault again...fucking ssi , cause i did not go into their
safe and grab the fucking game and post it to some site...and child i
do not have the fucking time to look for these sites, nor the
inclination, nor the time to download the fucking multi hundred mb
game if it was posted to a pirated site. All i am guilty of is having
the greatest girlfriend in the world pick me up a copy of the game
that was on sale at a computer show in San Juan while she was
attending a seminar, if this copy, is grey, white, black or yellow,
market who the fuck cares, and if it was a pirated printed cd ( it did
not seem to be at the time, but now it does, as i have seen the store
boxes) who the fuck cares again as that is for SSi to find their
fucking weasel, what am i the fucking SSI police, their door is open
so fuck them if they can't keep it shut , i
have nice day with you little project page
Joe

Message has been deleted

scha...@hotmail.com

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to

In article <356ead35...@news.mindspring.com>,
nobr...@unleesrjed.Clampet (j...@bsfilter.com) wrote:

[le snip grandee]

Hi Derek!!!!

P.S. BC3K may not suck--DtUM sucked--but it sure is hella boring. Zzzzz.
Takes the noble idea of free stellar exploration and sucks all the fun out of
it.

Message has been deleted

nobr...@unleesrjed.clampet

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to

On 28 May 1998 03:16:02 GMT, ft...@aol.com (Fthx) wrote:

>"joe", you dumbass, go ahead and announce some "abandonware is legit" sites
>here and see how quickly they get shut down. Note that I don't give two shits
>about the issue, except for how it proves your raging ignorance.
>
>As for your, ahem, copy of Panzer Commander, you conveniently ignored the SSI
>request for information for about ten days, until the actual game was firmly on
>the shelves, and I rubbed your nose in it. Judging by posts about the game on
>Deja News (alt.2600.warez comment on May 5), I think you got a version (final
>or otherwise) from a warez newsgroup. But it hardly matters, because all I
>care about the issue is how it continues to show what a fool you are.
>
>And right now I still think you're Derek Smart, but either way you're a
>confirmed dumbass and asshole. If you're not Derek Smart, then
>congratulations, you may be a bigger dumbass than he is.
>
>fthx
jackshit, so i have no life but this newsgroup right you little
pompous turd ! So i can't work, spend time with my girlfriend after
she spent weeks away, maybe hang five a little, go to my work related
conferences..no ii have to bend over and kiss your ass, nah that is a
job left for Bill the huffwindbag , and Jimmy who in Hawaii couldn't
get a cute babe to save his pineapple rations

you seriously want me to read this damn group constantly ! Listen
child maybe your life consists of burger king, fries, this and other
newsgroups, and that ridiculous page, but my life does not , get out
of junior high dude, get a fucking job or work on an advanced degree,
mr. deja news shit for pbrains why the fuck should i list the
abandonware sites when you oh fucking master of dejanews can do it
yourself, maybe i AM nieve, since shit for brains i never stole a
thing in my life, my neivitie is further proof of my innocense you
jerk, as IF abandonware is not legit, and i was a pirate why the hell
would i post about it ? My impression was that it wasn't , if not, big
shit i made a mistake, did i steal anything from the sites, that IF
you wanted you should to a dejanews search for the header abandonware
dated a few weeks ago , there was a few listed

Right i download to my lab a few hundred mb for an ssi game, from a
pirate site try telling that to the 11 others that share this lab and
uise the computer even though we are allowed the luxuary of using are
own concoted e-mail names, and when i e-mail sigma scientific for
product support do you think i use this monoker

i am a Fool huh, your the only idiot that has been blowing Bill's
dick from day one, has a psychopathic web page that if derek was able
to be
found to have farted , burped or picked his toe nails on line and be
detected by others thru future technology you, you fucking parasite
would post the event on your ludicrous web page, what you going to do
run a thesis search on my phd next you net gestopo sicko

joe

nobr...@unleesrjed.clampet

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to

On 28 May 1998 02:40:12 GMT, ft...@aol.com (Fthx) wrote:

>So, "joe", is K....-Smart not going to E3 after all? Did he fail to produce,
>as usual, or is he saving his money for legal fees? Have you noticed that his
>beloved press attention has dried up again, and that he quietly raised the
>price of his unfinished game from $15 to $25 today (the one he's already given
>away, which is available with The Box from Chips and Bits for $9)? Isn't it
>funny that the $15 patch he's been promising for well over half a year is
>nowhere in sight (and surely not going to sell for $15 if he ever finishes it)?
> Don't you think he's about ready to attack a vending machine right now?
>
>fthx
so he is not me now, so the great godlike fthx.. popped a fuse way
back and made a big mistake ? .btw what the hell does that stand
for,..ie fthx you have my curiosity ...ops now its gone , sorry i'll
let you go back to being the scribe of your useless usenet manuscipts
and the weighty fat useless webpage tome that you and bilbo the Huff
love so well. maybe you guys are writting your own damn bible?

PJL

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to


Derek Smart <dsm...@pobox.com> wrote in article
<6ki2ck$9...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>...

Does any one believe this one?

>
> >Received: from growl.pobox.com ([208.210.124.27])

> >Message-ID: <001001bd8673$a41a7400$ddeb5cc3@karoem8m>
> >From: "Paul Keith Collins"
> >To:
> >Subject: BattleCruiser 3000AD
> >Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 18:51:02 +0100
> >

> >Hello,
> > I have lust recently connected to the Internet and i am very pleased to
find this site related to BC3000AD.
> >
> >I have had BC3000AD since it was released by GameTek and i was surprised
to read in the Manual that i
> >downloaded from this site that the Version 1 of BC3000AD was incomplete
as i found it to be a very enjoyable
> >program which i admit i play at least Four times a week for around Three
Hours at a time.
> >

He's been playing version 1.0 for 12 hours a week?

PJL

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to


Fthx <ft...@aol.com> wrote in article
<199805280240...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...


> So, "joe", is K....-Smart not going to E3 after all? Did he fail to
produce,
> as usual, or is he saving his money for legal fees? Have you noticed
that his
> beloved press attention has dried up again, and that he quietly raised
the
> price of his unfinished game from $15 to $25 today (the one he's already
given
> away, which is available with The Box from Chips and Bits for $9)? Isn't
it
> funny that the $15 patch he's been promising for well over half a year is
> nowhere in sight (and surely not going to sell for $15 if he ever
finishes it)?
> Don't you think he's about ready to attack a vending machine right now?
>
> fthx

And it's dropping on the download charts!

>

Bruce Gottfred

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to

Eric Evans wrote:
>
> In article <356C72...@newbridge.com>, Bruce Gottfred <bruce_g...@newbridge.com> wrote:
>
> >The only reasons are either that you do
> >not have a PhD or, (a hypothesis Bill has not considered) that you are
> >100%, absolutely, certifiably, bug-fuck crazy. I personally believe
> >both are true.
>
> This bit made me laugh harder than I have since Aldus walked among us.
> Bug-fuck crazy? What is that?

Dunno really. Where I got it from is kind of interesting though...

Was thinking about libel suits yesterday and recalled one where Harlan
Ellison was sued for calling some comic book writer 'bug-fuck crazy' in
an published interview. The phrase stuck in my head. Thing is, he was
praising the guy when he said it and went on to call him a genius. I
guess he likes crazy people. Turns out the guy really was a little
crazy and sued for libel. He lost, but it cost alot for Harlan and the
interviewer to defend themselves.

Now, by calling Derek 'BFC', I have legal precident that it is a
compliment and therefore not libelous. :)

Bruce

John Mills

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to

Bruce Gottfred wrote:
>
<snip excellent post>
> Anyone other than the regular bunch of detractors want to tell Derek
> what his rep looks like? And who's fault it is? Don't be shy....
>
> Bruce...

You have stated it so eloquently.

<derekelogical record)
I am an academic who has trained PhD students. If Derek was a student of
mine I would be ashamed of him, ashamed of myself for training him, and
ashamed of my school for awarding him a PhD.

His actions on-line are completely unprofessional and IMO, have reduced
his reputation amongst his peers (ie those with a PhD) to zero long
before Bill's WEB site appeared. Bill's site is just typical of the the
ridicule Dereks has attracted to himself.

And I would be happy to testify as much in a libel action

</derekelogical record>

John

Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

PJL

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to


Bruce Gottfred <bruce_g...@newbridge.com> wrote in article
<356D5A...@newbridge.com>...


> Eric Evans wrote:
> >
> > In article <356C72...@newbridge.com>, Bruce Gottfred
<bruce_g...@newbridge.com> wrote:
> >
> > >The only reasons are either that you do
> > >not have a PhD or, (a hypothesis Bill has not considered) that you are
> > >100%, absolutely, certifiably, bug-fuck crazy. I personally believe
> > >both are true.
> >
> > This bit made me laugh harder than I have since Aldus walked among
us.
> > Bug-fuck crazy? What is that?
>
> Dunno really. Where I got it from is kind of interesting though...
>
> Was thinking about libel suits yesterday and recalled one where Harlan
> Ellison was sued for calling some comic book writer 'bug-fuck crazy' in
> an published interview. The phrase stuck in my head. Thing is, he was
> praising the guy when he said it and went on to call him a genius. I
> guess he likes crazy people. Turns out the guy really was a little
> crazy and sued for libel. He lost, but it cost alot for Harlan and the
> interviewer to defend themselves.

Wasn't there a song about a needle-dicked bug f**ker?
Is there an x-rated Dr. Demento album around?

Eric Evans

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to

In article <356ce1f2...@news.mindspring.com>, nobr...@unleesrjed.Clampet (j...@bsfilter.com) wrote:
<snip>

>>fthx
>jackshit, so i have no life but this newsgroup right you little
>pompous turd ! So i can't work, spend time with my girlfriend after
>she spent weeks away, maybe hang five a little, go to my work related
>conferences..no ii have to bend over and kiss your ass, nah that is a
>job left for Bill the huffwindbag , and Jimmy who in Hawaii couldn't
>get a cute babe to save his pineapple rations
>
<more snip>

Boy, between Joe's rants here and cleve's rants on the sexism/Bauman thread,
I feel like we're all getting some rare glimpses into the psyche of the truly
disturbed (or to use my new favorite saying - bug-fuck crazies). This may
truly be the golden age of Usenet...

Bill Huffman

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to

In article <356deb07...@news.mindspring.com>,

j...@bsfilter.com <nobr...@unleesrjed.Clampet> wrote:
>On 28 May 1998 02:40:12 GMT, ft...@aol.com (Fthx) wrote:
>
>>So, "joe", is K....-Smart not going to E3 after all? Did he fail to produce,
>>as usual, or is he saving his money for legal fees? Have you noticed that his
>>beloved press attention has dried up again, and that he quietly raised the
>>price of his unfinished game from $15 to $25 today (the one he's already given
>>away, which is available with The Box from Chips and Bits for $9)? Isn't it
>>funny that the $15 patch he's been promising for well over half a year is
>>nowhere in sight (and surely not going to sell for $15 if he ever finishes it)?
>> Don't you think he's about ready to attack a vending machine right now?
>>
>>fthx
>so he is not me now, so the great godlike fthx.. popped a fuse way
>back and made a big mistake ? .btw what the hell does that stand
>for,..ie fthx you have my curiosity ...ops now its gone , sorry i'll
>let you go back to being the scribe of your useless usenet manuscipts
>and the weighty fat useless webpage tome that you and bilbo the Huff
>love so well. maybe you guys are writting your own damn bible?

Boy Derek, when you have your joe@bsfilter disguise on you have
some real creative ideas. You spawned "Bashers for Justice" and
now you have spawned "Friars against Fraud" or "Scribes of Truth".

Jonathan Normington

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to

dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) recently wrote:

><snipped some choice insults>

Actually, you snipped some quite reasonable points, and responded to
the insults. Does that seem backward to anyone else?

--
Jonathan Normington


Bill Huffman

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to

In article <6khtff$naq$1...@topsy.kiva.net>,

Eric Evans <ere...@kivaNOSPAM.net> wrote:
>In article <356C72...@newbridge.com>, Bruce Gottfred <bruce_g...@newbridge.com> wrote:
>
>>The only reasons are either that you do
>>not have a PhD or, (a hypothesis Bill has not considered) that you are
>>100%, absolutely, certifiably, bug-fuck crazy. I personally believe
>>both are true.
>
> This bit made me laugh harder than I have since Aldus walked among us.
>Bug-fuck crazy? What is that?

The whole post was a riot! I don't know what certifiably bug-fuck crazy
is but, it sure must be a lot worse than just wacko crazy. I wonder if
the con artist that sold Derek his diploma would sell me a certificate
that Derek is bug-fuck crazy? I bet he would. Derek, what is the
con artist's address? Oh never mind, I can just print myself up one
at home. Derek, would you like a copy to hang on your wall next to
your other certificates, accolades, and thesis?

Bill Huffman

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to

In article <199805272009...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,

Fthx <ft...@aol.com> wrote:
>Speaking of meeting Derek in Atlanta, the "big moment" has come at last. The
>Taco Supreme Commander is probably on his way there. Not only do his posts
>stop for a little while (at least we can hope that he doesn't have access), but
>we can watch carefully to see if j...@bsfilter.com (who was conspicuously silent
>while Derek was ranting in volume about Unreal in the action group, but came
>back briefly after K....-Smart PhD retreated) takes another "break". After
>seeing "joe" get toasted on the Panzer Commander and "abandonware" issues, I'm
>eager to see fresh evidence that Derek == "joe".
>
>But when the Taco Supreme Commander returns, the big question for most
>Derekologists will be: Manic or Depressive?
>
>fthx

Hasn't he always been manic after E3? He talks to a publisher or two
and they politely sluff him off and he seems to get all excited for
months until he realizes that nothing is going to come of it?

nobr...@unleesrjed.clampet

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to

On 28 May 1998 14:44:15 GMT, ft...@aol.com (Fthx) wrote:

>"joe" said:
>
>>On 28 May 1998 03:16:02 GMT, ft...@aol.com (Fthx) wrote:
>>
>>>"joe", you dumbass, go ahead and announce some "abandonware is legit" sites
>>>here and see how quickly they get shut down. Note that I don't give two
>>shits
>>>about the issue, except for how it proves your raging ignorance.
>>>
>>>As for your, ahem, copy of Panzer Commander, you conveniently ignored the
>>SSI
>>>request for information for about ten days, until the actual game was firmly
>>on
>>>the shelves, and I rubbed your nose in it. Judging by posts about the game
>>on
>>>Deja News (alt.2600.warez comment on May 5), I think you got a version
>>(final
>>>or otherwise) from a warez newsgroup. But it hardly matters, because all I
>>>care about the issue is how it continues to show what a fool you are.
>>>
>>>And right now I still think you're Derek Smart, but either way you're a
>>>confirmed dumbass and asshole. If you're not Derek Smart, then
>>>congratulations, you may be a bigger dumbass than he is.
>>>

>>>fthx
>>jackshit, so i have no life but this newsgroup right you little

>>pompous turd ! [etc.]
>
>Dumbass, you had your ass up these newsgroups during that time, but you just
>ignored the request for information (after writing many long, unsuccessful
>rants trying to defend yourself), because you didn't have a credible story.
>Reminds me a little bit of someone who claims to have a PhD, but get tangles up
>in a web of lies when trying to explain it.


>
>>Right i download to my lab a few hundred mb for an ssi game, from a
>>pirate site try telling that to the 11 others that share this lab and
>>uise the computer even though we are allowed the luxuary of using are
>>own concoted e-mail names, and when i e-mail sigma scientific for
>>product support do you think i use this monoker
>

>Oh, this is good. Your story now is that you're sharing an email address? So
>when you make one of your public email bombing or piracy threats (see late
>March) it's a "lab" that's posting the messages? Yeah, that's a good one.
>
>You've bragged about how great your newsgroup service is these days, and how it
>has everything, so tell us, which warez group did you get Panzer Commander
>from? Or go ahead and blow more smoke about pirate sites, your secret PhD, and
>of course your secret name!
>
>fthx
You really are as stupid as you sound aren't you, like when my usenet
feeds were coming thru a small mom and pop isp that got their usenet
service thru netcom, you as a fucking genuis thought i had netcom as a
isp, what an asshole, it must be true what they say about people on
AOL , there fucking stupid!!, or maybe i should apologise and just say
your the only idiot on aol. Junior my lab has 22 pop3 boxes you smuck
2 for each individuals duh 11x2=22 , can you understand that manure
mind. i am able to port my pop's to my home computer as well
but that connection is not up to par for any stretch of the
imaginastion of trying to keep it running for ages to pirate anything
that has the size of a game of several hundred mbs, to be stolen off
the net.

What threats did i make, i made an opinion , i said i felt that a
certain company and HUNDREDS of others agreeded, screwed us. There was
talk of lawsuits against therm, in addition to people who claimed
they would consider doing a lot of things . If you are so fucking
fried that a verbose angry rant which has its roots in a legitimate
swindle, can be taken as proof of motivation, intent, and execution
of the rant, then don't even think of applying to law school homer


If your so hot to steal PC why don't you ,you lame ass that has never
probably bought a game in your life go off like the little rat you are
and steal it. If ya send me your home address i might send ya the
game, with some added extras in the box but first i may have to
"save" up 3 of four meals worth of oat bran cereal to fully give you
the "gift" bonus in the box..hehehe a gift from me to you or literally
from inside me to you
shouldn't you be in school today i am sure there is a rather large
dude on your high school football team that is waiting to knock the
shit out of you somewhere in that pimple town you call home, or maybe
you took the day off to stay home and use MOMMIES computer account,
and sift thru her undies draw when she ain't home, so tell me junior
which to you like better, wearing your mommies undies are sniffing the
dirty ones

sicko now that E3 has begun and supposedly Derek is there who the hell
am i , has Derek cloned himself you manaic
let me let you go , you are probably behind schedule for your quarter
hour jerk off while dreaming of derek's ass, a momme of fthx quality
time

Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

Jimmy Chan

unread,
May 28, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/28/98
to

Jonathan Normington (rep...@souragne.demon.co.uk) wrote:
:#dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) recently wrote:

:#><snipped some choice insults>

:#Actually, you snipped some quite reasonable points, and responded to
:#the insults. Does that seem backward to anyone else?

If you realize it's DS, then it's perfectly reasonable. Same as someone
who creates a big hubbub of killfiling posters then asks others to email
him the posts. Totally within character.


--
==============================ji...@hawaii.edu===============================

Jason

unread,
May 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/29/98
to

Has an expansion disk been released for the 'online game'?
Or is this patch v1.7777 which fixes the humour bug?

Glad to see people returning to play an old classic.
Even though I've mainly been a lurker here, I've kinda missed you guys
Cheers.

Bill Huffman

unread,
May 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/29/98
to

In article <199805281954...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
Fthx <ft...@aol.com> wrote:

>Bill Huffman said:
>
>>Hasn't he always been manic after E3? He talks to a publisher or two
>>and they politely sluff him off and he seems to get all excited for
>>months until he realizes that nothing is going to come of it?
>
>Last year was definitely a big manic event for Derek, with Take2 playing him
>like a drum, but this year he may have burned off too much of his manic energy
>already, and post-E3 could be a depressive Derekological event. I think he's
>admitted that he wasn't able to pull off a Windows demo, and the faithful few
>(amidst a frenzied round of submissive military role playing that Derek runs at
>the Taco Palace) are *still* waiting for his latest DOS patch. The "new screen
>shots" announcements aren't getting him anywhere either, and playing the
>"lawsuit card" is yet another big PR loss for his Taco Supremeness. It won't
>be long before we get another round of weak boastful promises, and then it will
>quickly become obvious that no product is in sight this year. The only big
>question is how screwed up the continuing DOS support will be, and whether
>something that could roughly be considered a finished game will be achieved.
>It's unclear whether he's even going to E3 this year, but that's what this
>trolling is all about.
>
>As for 1996's E3, I think Derek was a no-show because of the "Take2 taking
>over" affair, and surely it went down in the books as a depressive event for
>Derek. I think the "I'll prove you wrong at E3" boasts are a long tradition,
>but I don't know any more of the history.
>
>fthx, PhD (Derekology)

We'll I'm here in Atlanta looking for Derek at the hotel. I'm just
standing around waiting for Derek to beat me up. I saw someone that
might have been joe@bsfilter. He looked like Derek only he was wearing
Groucho Marx glasses with the big nose and a black brush mustache
hanging underneath. I said good morning but, he just blurted out a
"Jackass" and hurried on. Maybe it wasn't him or maybe he didn't
recognize me? I knew we should have arranged a meeting place and time.
It will be a bummer to come all this way then, not get beat up.

Eric Evans

unread,
May 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/29/98
to

You know, this comment brings me back to my college days when I first read
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (which admittedly is a timely topic since the
movie just came out). While I'm sure people have parodied E3 using F&LILV, it
might be mildly humorous to do so in the context of Derek at E3.
Some obvious parallels:

1. Instead of drug induced paranoia causing all the DA's in the hotel lobby
to turn into lizards, Derek could possibly experience his typical non-drug
induced (supposedly) paranoia and see everyone as being detractors.
2. Raoul Duke posed as a law-enforcement type - Derek poses as a PhD holding
game developer.
3. Raoul Duke travelled with his attorney/accomplice, DS has his Dan or
whoever the butt kisser flavor of the day is.
4. Raoul and his attorney are rude and threatening to everyone, Derek and his
buddies... well, I think we get the picture.

Feel free to add to this list those who are familiar with the book.

In article <6kmuv0$9...@si611.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM>,

Derek Smart

unread,
May 29, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/29/98
to

On Tue, 26 May 1998 22:06:08 GMT, dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) wrote:

Bill Huffman sent me email of post he made on the strategic group, indicating
he had an 'offer' for me. Here is the offer which was not part of that post
that he made.

>Note to Derek: If you publicly admit in this newsgroup that
>your "alma mater" was not accredited, my offer to you that I will
>take down my PhDFraud web page and put up a DegreeMill (or something)
>web page is still good. Or, if you publicly name your "alma mater"
>then, I offer to take down my web page and not put up another.
>These offers are being made in the spirit that the truth should
>prevail!

Here is my response

>Bill
>
>(a) I have *NO* interest in *ANY* of your offers. I made this quite clear in my last correspondence of several weeks ago. Which part did you NOT get?
>
>(b) You CONTINUED this farce when you started creating numerous threads on the newsgroup containing details of what had transpired betweeen you, myself and Eric (my attorney). I felt compelled to respond (after WEEKS of seeing crap) only because you implied that I had threatened you with violence in that mail you posted. I simply wanted to set the record straight that I hadn't and also to explain what I meant. Your claim was not only false, but Eric even went further and set the record straight. That, obviously, was not good enough for you.
>
>(c) As for the 'agreement', I was using the term loosely to include our phone conversation and numerous email with Eric and others. I told you what I wanted and that was more than enough. When you 'discovered' that there was a possibility that my college was not accredited in the US, you switched gears and started your diploma mill nonsense.
>
>(d) I will tell you this for the *LAST* time. You have a choice, you clean up your act, remove the web site and leave me the hell alone, or pay the legal consequences. I know for a FACT that you don't expect me to cave in at this point and give any info. As Eric aptly put it, you will find out but at a cost greater than the aggravation and ridicule that you have caused me. Your actions have been documented and since they were not provoked (sure you have seen the 1996 posts of which we have a countless number from you) are deemed to be malicious and of same intent. The US legal system is not as smooth and fast as we would like and bringing a case such as this takes quite some planning, facts have to be collected and the chances of a win, evaluated. I do not intend to go into a situation where I will lose even if the information were made available. I don't plan on losing nor do I have any intention of wasting Eric's time and of course money that I could spend on other more important
matters.
>
>You, my friend, will *NEVER* get a free ticket out this unless you walk away - in defeat. You WILL be defeated, one way or another. Only you will lose face. Only you will deal with the humiliation. A public apology from you will *NEVER* make up for the aggravation, embarassment and ridicule that you have subjected myself, my friends, my colleagues and my family to.
>
>I - will - make - you - pay. This, I promise.
>
>If you think saying that my college is not accredited in the US solves your problem, you're in for a shock you're not likely to recover from in a hurry.
>You have a LOT to learn about accreditation and how it works.
>
>As for you suing me for posting your office number. LOL, go ahead! NCR is a public company. We found out that's where you worked and all I posted were your office address and tel number. You are more than willing to post my 800 number too. It's a company number and not illegal for you to post. In providing that info, I was merely clarifying the post in which you, again, falsely, indicated that I had threatened violence when you knew for a FACT that I was talking about legal ramifications of your actions. I needed to clarify what 'info' I had told Eric I now had access to, via my own private sources.
>
>I hope your 'online buddies' are willing to step up to the plate for you when the time comes, because one thing I can tell you for free, my friends remain, my friends and when I need them, they'll be there.
>
>Notice that I have cc'ed Mark Asher and Cmr Krud on this. Since I have NO intentions of responding to your shit online (and haven't for several months now), I want to make sure someone else outside 'my circle' knows what the heck is going on because I know you will continue to post your shit online because you just can't let go. I know Mark and Krud as much as I know you (you probably don't get what I mean, but then, that's just you) and if anything, those two were bigger thorns in my side (over the game's release) than you can ever aspire to be.
>
>There, you have my response. Go do what you want with it.

Derek Smart, Ph.D.
Designer/Lead Developer
Battlecruiser:3000AD

"The man who follows the crowd will usually get no further
than the crowd. The man who walks alone is likely to find
himself in places no one has ever been."

ICQ : 158435
Email : mailto:dsm...@pobox.com
Media Contact : mailto:bc3000a...@mindspring.com
World Wide Web : www.bc3000ad.com
BC3K Latest News : www.bc3000ad.com/temp/gnn.html
Active Worlds : Teleport to GALCOM at www.activeworlds.com

Miguel Costa

unread,
May 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/30/98
to

>Ha, "joe", whether you're Derek or not (I still think you are, but if not
>yourability to emulate his behavior is incredible

Well look at the message source. They both use the same version of Forte
Agent!

>X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451

Might not be much, but does add some strengh to your theory.

Krud

unread,
May 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/30/98
to

Miguel Costa wrote in message ...

>>Ha, "joe", whether you're Derek or not (I still think you are, but if not
>>yourability to emulate his behavior is incredible
>
>Well look at the message source. They both use the same version of Forte
>Agent!


I bet they both use the same version of Windows 95 too.

-Krud

Chuck

unread,
May 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/30/98
to

Derek Smart wrote:
>
> On Tue, 26 May 1998 22:06:08 GMT, dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) wrote:
>
> Bill Huffman sent me email of post he made on the strategic group, indicating
> he had an 'offer' for me. Here is the offer which was not part of that post
> that he made.
>

<Snip>

Derek,

Boy o boy, do I bet I'm gonna regret getting into this, but I've
followed the BK3000 online game off and on for some time, and thought
maybe some perspectives from a "lurker" might be interesting.

Most of the time, people arguments aren't answered by you, just random
insults, but there's plenty of that going both ways.

I personally think you probably "bought" your Ph.D.. Anybody who worked
that hard and took as much crap as you had wouldn't be hiding unless
your the most stubborn egomaniac ever. As an observer, I don't buy the
"my university will be harassed" BS. It's too simple to just make this
go away.

You say they will just change tracks. Sure, but you will have WON that
one.

You say it doesn't matter if you have a Ph.D. or not. Wrong. You are
using it in a public forum, and I think any real Ph.D. would gladly give
up credentials if asked (unless there is something embarrassing about
the credentials). By the way, I'm an M.D. and I find any bullshit
credentials offensive (Medical College of Georgia Class of '93, Board
Certified in Internal Medicine '96 ... see how easy it was.)

Lastly, I know little about the law, but I know slander and libel are
very tough to prove. Like it or not, your a public figure who has
apparently been caught up in a couple of "half-truths" about your game
and life. You got to expect some crap. Now you managed to scare some
of the kiddies with your lawyer. I'm not naive enough about the law to
think that just because your talking lawsuit means your right. It isn't
unusual that with the right lawyer and enough money (mama's ??) the law
can be twisted against the average joe. I find these tactics
worrisome. You brought a lot of this grief on yourself and now you want
to quit, but don't want to lose. So you try to scare everyone else into
shutting up. Well, I tell you what, I'll probably chip into the Bill
Huffman defense fund just to see what happens and see what the truth
really is. (by the way, if I get any letters that I perceive as trying
to suppress my right to voice my opinion, I will make them
public...Netiquette be damned...Fair warning).

Now, you may just blow this all off as just another detractor, but like
I said in the beginning, this is just the perspective of a lurker. You
say your worried about your reputation, but I've seen you damage that
enough by yourself.

My 2 cents,

Chuck (see I don't advertise the M.D. when it really isn't pertinent,
and I busted my ass for it)

Chuck

unread,
May 30, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/30/98
to

By the way, I thought it was very cool when you started giving BC3000
away. I don't have it but really got the idea you were "putting your
money where your mouth is"

Chuck

Brandon

unread,
May 31, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/31/98
to

Same version of Free Agent?! Possibly the most used newsreader and
you think that say something? Hmmmm. Now if you said they both
were using 17" monitors i'd believe you...


On Sat, 30 May 1998 00:15:09 -0400, "Miguel Costa" <Mig...@Csi.com>
wrotd:

>>Ha, "joe", whether you're Derek or not (I still think you are, but if not
>>yourability to emulate his behavior is incredible
>
>Well look at the message source. They both use the same version of Forte
>Agent!
>

>>X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451
>
>Might not be much, but does add some strengh to your theory.
>
>
>
>

Remove SPAM ME to send me email @:

andon...@MEgte.net

Clay Cahill

unread,
May 31, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/31/98
to

I heard that "Miguel Costa" <Mig...@Csi.com> said:

>>Ha, "joe", whether you're Derek or not (I still think you are, but if not
>>yourability to emulate his behavior is incredible
>
>Well look at the message source. They both use the same version of Forte
>Agent!
>
>>X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451

You know... So do I. SO ipsofacto, I must be Derek Smart! Where's that
damn Coke machine! I'll murderlize it!

Clay-


............................................................................
: Duct Tape is like the Force. It has a light side and a dark side, and it:
: holds the universe together. The only difference is that "May The Force :
: be with you" sounds a lot nicer than "May you be covered in duct tape." :
:..........................................................................:
Clay . A . Cahill (at) intel . com -Take out the spaces and put in the @-
Cha...@midtown.net

Derek Smart

unread,
May 31, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/31/98
to

On Sat, 30 May 1998 11:28:31 -0400, Chuck <"ccraton@nospam"@mindspring.com>
wrote:

I had a reason. I wanted to prove a point. Being that is has been in the
charts since it was released in Feb. Coupled with the number of new
registrations (the free version cannot be patched to the upcoming version),
carried on magazines worldwide (US, Australia, Czech, Italy, France, Poland,
Hungary, S. Korea, Netherlands, Germany etc) and the recent Yahoo Internet Life
stats (May issue) that it was the 5th most downloaded game (even at 50MB) _and_
including the flood of email about how cool people think it is....I think I've
pretty much proven my point. In order to have proven it otherwise, I would need
a re-release. Since the sequel is in full swing, it would still have left BC3K
(the original) in a 'shady zone'. I needed to get it 'out there' so that it's
original stigma didn't cloud the imminent succes of the sequel. And since I had
no intentions (nor the resources) to put it back in stores, coupled with the
fact that I had already started working on the sequel which I hope will be
received in a different manner, giving it away, put it _exactly_ where I wanted
it to be - out there. It's not like I was getting paid for it. So, what did I
have to lose? In fact, I had more to gain if anything.

In fact, it's been so successful, that I'm working on getting it re-released
and back into stores, just for the heck of it and to, once again, defy ALL odds
and logic. If the deal goes through (98% certain at this point), it should be
back in the stores this Summer. New box, manual, a discount coupon for the
sequel etc. The whole nine yards. The free version is v1.01D7C released in
11/97. The current version is light years more advanced than that and complete
with full blown to the max, 3Dfx acceleration. You've probably seen the screen
shots.

Derek Smart

unread,
May 31, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/31/98
to

On Sat, 30 May 1998 10:59:40 -0400, Chuck <"ccraton@nospam"@mindspring.com>
wrote:


>Derek,
>
>Boy o boy, do I bet I'm gonna regret getting into this,

Noted. Everyone deserves an opinion.
Opinions ignored, discarded and laughed at.
Deemed Irrelevant.
Doesn't change a thing.
End of comment

About that defense fund, Huffman's office phone num is listed in one of the
thread. Call him up and get his address so you can send him a check. Believe
me, he's going to need it.

As for sending you letters/email etc. Don't flatter yourself. We don't contact
anybody other than the principals involved in this farce - Mr. Huffman.
Besides, he started making confidential email about this issue public, so, I
followed suit only to make my position clear.

Bill Huffman

unread,
May 31, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/31/98
to

In article <6krvrv$k...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>,
Derek Smart <dsm...@pobox.com> wrote:
...snip..

>In order to have proven it otherwise, I would need
>a re-release. Since the sequel is in full swing, it would still have left BC3K
>(the original) in a 'shady zone'. I needed to get it 'out there' so that it's
>original stigma didn't cloud the imminent succes of the sequel. And since I had
>no intentions (nor the resources) to put it back in stores,
...snip...

Derek would you care to explain an apparent inconsistency in your story here.
A few months a go you said that you would republish BC3K on your own if need
be. When people questioned you how you could have the funds to do that, you
stated that you had plenty of money. You claimed that you could get a million
dollars anytime you wanted just by filling out a little paper work. Don't you
remember? What's wrong? Did you fill out your lottery ticket and somehow you
didn't win?

>Derek Smart, Ph.D.

K. Mathias

unread,
May 31, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/31/98
to

To those still arguing this old topic, do the rest of us a favor and be sure
to put "Derek Smart" or "BC3K" in the subject so our newsreaders can
properly kill this crap. Notice I've altered it to read "Mr. Derek Smart"
and not just "Mr. Smart"

Thanks!

Clay Cahill wrote in message <35713794...@news.midtown.net>...

Riboflavin

unread,
May 31, 1998, 3:00:00 AM5/31/98
to

Derek Smart wrote in message <6ks052$k...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>...

>As for sending you letters/email etc. Don't flatter yourself. We don't
contact
>anybody other than the principals involved in this farce - Mr. Huffman.
>Besides, he started making confidential email about this issue public, so,
I
>followed suit only to make my position clear.
>
And another warping of truth from the black ego hole. You posted about your
lawsuit to this newsgroup as soon as you started it, oh Taco Supreme
Commander. You bragged that Baz had left because of it, even though he left
before your lawyer contacted him. You have been blabbing about this lawsuit
for quite a while now, please don't let the ego force warp reality so much
around you.

Also, could you tell us how Dan Brooks is a principal in this case? Does he
work for you? I thought he claimed to be an impartial observer, yet noting
the ccs to him he seems to have much closer ties to you.
--
Kevin Allegood ribotr...@mindspring.pants.com
Remove the pants from my email address to reply.
" Usually, people are talking about the colon, so I assume you are too." -
David Wright - wright at ibnets.com

Nai-Chi Lee

unread,
Jun 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/1/98
to

In article <356C72...@newbridge.com>, Bruce Gottfred <bruce_g...@newbridge.com> wrote:
>The only reasons are either that you do
>not have a PhD or, (a hypothesis Bill has not considered) that you are
>100%, absolutely, certifiably, bug-fuck crazy. I personally believe
>both are true.

Yesterday during my flight from Amsterdam to New York, the on-board
movie was "As Good As It Gets". Jack Nicholson, who plays an
obsessive/compulsive/abusive novelist, was asked by a female fan:
"How did you describe a woman sooo well?"

To this, he answered (something to the effect of):
"It's easy. I just think of a man... and then I remove all reasoning
and accountability"

Sounds like somebody we all know?
--
Nai-Chi

PJL

unread,
Jun 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/1/98
to


Derek Smart <dsm...@pobox.com> wrote in article
<6ks052$k...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>...


> On Sat, 30 May 1998 10:59:40 -0400, Chuck
<"ccraton@nospam"@mindspring.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> >Derek,
> >
> >Boy o boy, do I bet I'm gonna regret getting into this,
>
> Noted. Everyone deserves an opinion.
> Opinions ignored, discarded and laughed at.
> Deemed Irrelevant.
> Doesn't change a thing.
> End of comment
>
> About that defense fund, Huffman's office phone num is listed in one of
the
> thread. Call him up and get his address so you can send him a check.
Believe
> me, he's going to need it.

So when Bill's lawyer has you come in for a deposition, and the
first question he asks you is "Where is your PhD from?"
How will you answer this?
When he asks you, "what is the title of your thesis?"
Which title will you give him?


>
> As for sending you letters/email etc. Don't flatter yourself. We don't
contact
> anybody other than the principals involved in this farce - Mr. Huffman.

And Mark Asher and Krud, who seem to be on your mailing list too.

> Besides, he started making confidential email about this issue public,
so, I
> followed suit only to make my position clear.

It looked like he only paraphrased stuff.

>
>
> Derek Smart, Ph.D.

--
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Pat Lundrigan
///////////////

PJL

unread,
Jun 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/1/98
to


Derek Smart <dsm...@pobox.com> wrote in article

<6krvrv$k...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>...
> On Sat, 30 May 1998 11:28:31 -0400, Chuck
<"ccraton@nospam"@mindspring.com>


> wrote:
>
> >By the way, I thought it was very cool when you started giving BC3000
> >away. I don't have it but really got the idea you were "putting your
> >money where your mouth is"
> >
> >Chuck
>
> I had a reason. I wanted to prove a point. Being that is has been in the
> charts since it was released in Feb. Coupled with the number of new
> registrations (the free version cannot be patched to the upcoming
version),
> carried on magazines worldwide (US, Australia, Czech, Italy, France,
Poland,
> Hungary, S. Korea, Netherlands, Germany etc) and the recent Yahoo
Internet Life
> stats (May issue) that it was the 5th most downloaded game (even at 50MB)
_and_
> including the flood of email about how cool people think it is....I think
I've

> pretty much proven my point. In order to have proven it otherwise, I


would need
> a re-release. Since the sequel is in full swing, it would still have left
BC3K
> (the original) in a 'shady zone'. I needed to get it 'out there' so that
it's
> original stigma didn't cloud the imminent succes of the sequel. And since
I had

> no intentions (nor the resources) to put it back in stores, coupled with
the
> fact that I had already started working on the sequel which I hope will
be
> received in a different manner, giving it away, put it _exactly_ where I
wanted
> it to be - out there. It's not like I was getting paid for it. So, what
did I
> have to lose? In fact, I had more to gain if anything.
>
> In fact, it's been so successful, that I'm working on getting it
re-released
> and back into stores, just for the heck of it and to, once again, defy
ALL odds
> and logic. If the deal goes through (98% certain at this point), it
should be
> back in the stores this Summer. New box, manual, a discount coupon for
the
> sequel etc. The whole nine yards. The free version is v1.01D7C released
in
> 11/97.

Will this be the long awaited 'Developer's edition?'
Please give us more info on THE BOX.
Will it have a fold out cover, a blinking light, or
any other cool stuff?


--
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Pat Lundrigan
///////////////

Eric Evans

unread,
Jun 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/1/98
to

That does pose an interesting situation. What's going to happen when the
lawsuit gets underway and Derek has to disclose the info through discovery and
that discovery then becomes public information? Then, everyone will know.
How could this possibly be a winning situation for Mr. Smart? Sure, best case
scenario (for Derek) is that he spanks Huffman in court. I can't imagine any
judge awarding too much money to Mr. Smart once he/she sees some of the crap
that Smart says on Usenet. So the most Huffman will be out is attorney fees
and it seems that quite a few people here have offered to help with that
(myself included).
In return, Smart will have his PhD info (or lack thereof) revealed for all
to see, something he has fought long and hard to avoid. In fact, one would
think that his thesis would also be discoverable which would also make it
public knowledge even though Mr. Smart allegedly wouldn't publish it before
because of intellectual property reasons.
I think Mr. Rotbard might want to look into having the court precedings
sealed...

In article <01bd8d72$da252ee0$d58e...@lundrip.TEB.ALLIED.COM>, "PJL"

Bill Huffman

unread,
Jun 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/1/98
to

In article <6kp6uc$oaa$1...@camel25.mindspring.com>,
Chuck <"ccraton@nospam"@mindspring.com> wrote:

>Derek Smart wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 26 May 1998 22:06:08 GMT, dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) wrote:
>>
>> Bill Huffman sent me email of post he made on the strategic group, indicating
>> he had an 'offer' for me. Here is the offer which was not part of that post
>> that he made.
>>
>
><Snip>
>
>Derek,
>

>Boy o boy, do I bet I'm gonna regret getting into this, but I've
>followed the BK3000 online game off and on for some time, and thought
>maybe some perspectives from a "lurker" might be interesting.
>
>Most of the time, people arguments aren't answered by you, just random
>insults, but there's plenty of that going both ways.
>
>I personally think you probably "bought" your Ph.D.. Anybody who worked
>that hard and took as much crap as you had wouldn't be hiding unless
>your the most stubborn egomaniac ever. As an observer, I don't buy the
>"my university will be harassed" BS. It's too simple to just make this
>go away.
>
>You say they will just change tracks. Sure, but you will have WON that
>one.
>
>You say it doesn't matter if you have a Ph.D. or not. Wrong. You are
>using it in a public forum, and I think any real Ph.D. would gladly give
>up credentials if asked (unless there is something embarrassing about
>the credentials). By the way, I'm an M.D. and I find any bullshit
>credentials offensive (Medical College of Georgia Class of '93, Board
>Certified in Internal Medicine '96 ... see how easy it was.)

Mr. Rotbard used a term "bears on his profession". Something like "since
the PhD libel bears on his profession, damages will be inferred". (see
http://members.aol.com/Derekology/BashersForJustice/Part3.txt) What I
think this means is that if I have damaged the believability of Derek's
PhD and since it "bears on his profession" damages will be assumed.
This means that he has lost something of value. It is assumed that his
PhD gains him something of value from others, since it bears on his
profession. Now, let us say that is all fine legal theory (since I'm
not a lawyer I don't really know about that). (Note that even if
all of the above is totally true, I'm still not liable because Derek
must also prove that either I knew his PhD was real or I should have
known it was real. Eric Rotbard in Part8 admitted that I believe
the PhD bogus and in all the Parts implied I couldn't know whether
or not it was true. see Part2)

Let us look at "bears on his profession so damages will be inferred"
within the context of the definition of legal fraud (from my dictionary)
- intentional perversion of the truth in order to induce another to part
with something of value or to surrender a legal right. Wouldn't it mean
that since damages would be assumed above when it "bears on his
profession" that in this case legal fraud would be assumed when it bears
on his profession? Which would mean that Derek's arguments that he never
used his PhD to get a job etc. are just plain irrelevant (and self
defeating). Since his claim to a PhD from an accredited school bears on
his profession, it could be assumed that he did this in order to induce
another to part with something of value, and if this claim is untrue
then, wouldn't it mean legal fraud?.

And if that is all true wouldn't it mean that it would be smart
for Mr. Smart to drop the whole thing? Of course, the Smart flame-fest
as well as claiming a PhD from an accredited school that's probably
not true shows that Mr. Smart does not always make the smart choices.

>Lastly, I know little about the law, but I know slander and libel are
>very tough to prove. Like it or not, your a public figure who has
>apparently been caught up in a couple of "half-truths" about your game
>and life. You got to expect some crap. Now you managed to scare some
>of the kiddies with your lawyer. I'm not naive enough about the law to
>think that just because your talking lawsuit means your right. It isn't
>unusual that with the right lawyer and enough money (mama's ??) the law
>can be twisted against the average joe. I find these tactics
>worrisome. You brought a lot of this grief on yourself and now you want
>to quit, but don't want to lose. So you try to scare everyone else into
>shutting up. Well, I tell you what, I'll probably chip into the Bill
>Huffman defense fund just to see what happens and see what the truth
>really is. (by the way, if I get any letters that I perceive as trying
>to suppress my right to voice my opinion, I will make them
>public...Netiquette be damned...Fair warning).

Thank you very much, Chuck. This is also my point of view. It
is not really Derek against me. It is Derek versus truth and free
speech. Unfortunately, I just seemed to get caught in the middle. :-)

Derek Smart

unread,
Jun 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/1/98
to

On Mon, 01 Jun 98 16:21:27 GMT, ere...@NOSPAMkiva.net (Eric Evans) wrote:

> That does pose an interesting situation. What's going to happen when the
>lawsuit gets underway and Derek has to disclose the info through discovery and
>that discovery then becomes public information? Then, everyone will know.
>How could this possibly be a winning situation for Mr. Smart? Sure, best case
>scenario (for Derek) is that he spanks Huffman in court. I can't imagine any
>judge awarding too much money to Mr. Smart once he/she sees some of the crap
>that Smart says on Usenet. So the most Huffman will be out is attorney fees
>and it seems that quite a few people here have offered to help with that
>(myself included).
> In return, Smart will have his PhD info (or lack thereof) revealed for all
>to see, something he has fought long and hard to avoid. In fact, one would
>think that his thesis would also be discoverable which would also make it
>public knowledge even though Mr. Smart allegedly wouldn't publish it before
>because of intellectual property reasons.
> I think Mr. Rotbard might want to look into having the court precedings
>sealed...

Don't worry, we've already had these discussions. My attorneys are competent
and know exactly what needs to be done. Huffman is going to get more than a
slap on the wrist. Trust me on this. So, you guys had better set up a 'Huffman
defense fund' pretty soon. Just in case you folks who just post for the heck of
it don't what something like this costs, you'd better start saving now.

Eric Evans

unread,
Jun 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/1/98
to

Oh, I think I have a pretty good idea what something like this is going to
end up costing on both sides...

In article <6kv3ai$j...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>, dsm...@pobox.com wrote:

>Don't worry, we've already had these discussions. My attorneys are competent
>and know exactly what needs to be done. Huffman is going to get more than a
>slap on the wrist. Trust me on this. So, you guys had better set up a 'Huffman
>defense fund' pretty soon. Just in case you folks who just post for the heck of
>it don't what something like this costs, you'd better start saving now.
>

nobr...@unleesrjed.clampet

unread,
Jun 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/1/98
to

On Thu, 28 May 98 15:19:51 GMT, ere...@kivaNOSPAM.net (Eric Evans)
wrote:

>In article <356ce1f2...@news.mindspring.com>, nobr...@unleesrjed.Clampet (j...@bsfilter.com) wrote:
><snip>
>>>fthx
>>jackshit, so i have no life but this newsgroup right you little
>>pompous turd ! So i can't work, spend time with my girlfriend after
>>she spent weeks away, maybe hang five a little, go to my work related
>>conferences..no ii have to bend over and kiss your ass, nah that is a
>>job left for Bill the huffwindbag , and Jimmy who in Hawaii couldn't
>>get a cute babe to save his pineapple rations
>>
><more snip>
>
> Boy, between Joe's rants here and cleve's rants on the sexism/Bauman thread,
>I feel like we're all getting some rare glimpses into the psyche of the truly
>disturbed (or to use my new favorite saying - bug-fuck crazies). This may
>truly be the golden age of Usenet...
compliment accepted , let me know if you'd like me to redecorate your
home with or without my chainsaw <g>

nobr...@unleesrjed.clampet

unread,
Jun 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/1/98
to

On 29 May 1998 11:32:00 -0700, huf...@news.SanDiegoCA.ATTGIS.COM
(Bill Huffman) wrote:

>We'll I'm here in Atlanta looking for Derek at the hotel. I'm just
>standing around waiting for Derek to beat me up. I saw someone that
>might have been joe@bsfilter. He looked like Derek only he was wearing
>Groucho Marx glasses with the big nose and a black brush mustache
>hanging underneath. I said good morning but, he just blurted out a
>"Jackass" and hurried on. Maybe it wasn't him or maybe he didn't
>recognize me? I knew we should have arranged a meeting place and time.
>It will be a bummer to come all this way then, not get beat up.

hahahaha, Bill for the first time , considering all i have read in
all your , convoluted posts , you have finally made me laugh
so hard i practically had an embolism . Can't help you about not
meeting Derek, but if you wanted Joe as a Beer drinking buddy, You
should have looked in Brooklyn, and NOT Atlanta, that's way too far
south for this italio/irish mutt to be caught down there , heard they
used to hang grease balls like me in the deep south, years ago, and
being a Yankee well i am always afraid that the " deliverance" music
might start playing , and maybe you might take a peculiar , "shine"
to me <g>
Joe


Bruce Gottfred

unread,
Jun 1, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/1/98
to

Derek Smart wrote:

> Don't worry, we've already had these discussions. My attorneys are competent
> and know exactly what needs to be done. Huffman is going to get more than a
> slap on the wrist. Trust me on this. So, you guys had better set up a 'Huffman
> defense fund' pretty soon. Just in case you folks who just post for the heck of
> it don't what something like this costs, you'd better start saving now.

So lets get this straight: you have 'attorneys' (indicating more than one) working
on this case and you are going to seriously mess up Bill's life. Right?

> In fact, it's been so successful, that I'm working on getting it re-released
> and back into stores, just for the heck of it and to, once again, defy ALL odds
> and logic. If the deal goes through (98% certain at this point), it should be
> back in the stores this Summer. New box, manual, a discount coupon for the
> sequel etc. The whole nine yards. The free version is v1.01D7C released in

> 11/97. The current version is light years more advanced than that and complete
> with full blown to the max, 3Dfx acceleration. You've probably seen the screen
> shots.
>

You're going to re-release your (for the lack of a better word) 'game' with new
graphics into stores for this summer? Don't you remember what happened when you
promised the 'Developer's Edition'?

Derek, with the credibility problems you already have on this newsgroup, why do you
insist on making more huge lies to us readers? Do you seriously believe either of
these two promises?

Or maybe you've got your excuses worked out already? If you haven't here are some
suggestions:

For the suit:

"He's not worth it".
"I don't want to put my family through any more grief".
"I think I've made my point".
"I'm too busy for this shit".
"My psychiatrist said it wouldn't be good for my recovery".

For the game:

Aug/98: "Finishing off playtesting and debugging"
Oct/98: "Going to release for Christmas rush, more sales that way".
Jan/99: "Manuals lost at printers".
Apr/99: "Adding hyper-wonder-3d support"
Jun/98: "Adding internet play. Game will be even better! Trust me".
Sept/99: "Manual needs updating for internet play."
Jan/00: "Adding mouse interface".
Apr/00: "Waiting for Christmas rush".
Feb/01: "Modifying for Win95".
Feb/02: "Modifying for Win98".
Jun/02: "Adding 'boarding party' mode using the Doom engine".
Sept/02: "Modifying manual for 'boarding party' mode. Totally cool"!
Jan/03: "Adding support for Merced chip features".

Hopefully with these excuses already worked out, you'll find some time to get some
coding done. If you need more of them though, I'll try and help you out.

> Derek Smart <snip lengthy sig>

-----------Bruce Gottfred----------------------

Call me apathetic...
I don't care.

--------...@cyberus.ca-------------------

B P

unread,
Jun 2, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/2/98
to

On Fri, 29 May 1998 16:19:36 GMT, "Jason "
<jason....@futurenet.co.uk> wrote:

>
>Has an expansion disk been released for the 'online game'?
>Or is this patch v1.7777 which fixes the humour bug?

No this is patch
v1.7777df4c.56993dkfiut.sdekldskalkjslksmmijeeeslslkdsjh;lksd;kj......
Shit that's not funny. I guess the humor bug still isn't fixed.
Typical !

B P

unread,
Jun 2, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/2/98
to

On 28 May 1998 09:09:58 -0700, huf...@news.SanDiegoCA.ATTGIS.COM
(Bill Huffman) wrote:

> Oh never mind, I can just print myself up one
>at home. Derek, would you like a copy to hang on your wall next to
>your other certificates, accolades, and thesis?
You might be on to something here. Maybe Derek got his diploma from
PrintMaster U.
>
>


Eric Evans

unread,
Jun 2, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/2/98
to

Well, actually, that's confidential information. I did a pretty detailed
cost analysis on it awhile back but had to have it suppressed because of it's
proprietary info and I'm using it for the Entreprenuer DIM that I'm
developing. I could tell you what law firms I contacted for my research but I
wouldn't want you to bog them down by the hundreds of people who will
undoubtably call them to verify the information. But suffice to say the
information is out there for you to research and be amazed.

In article <35754d7c...@news.mindspring.com>, six...@mindspring.com (bp)
wrote:
>On Mon, 01 Jun 98 20:59:31 GMT, ere...@NOSPAMkiva.net (Eric Evans)
>wrote:
>


>> Oh, I think I have a pretty good idea what something like this is going to
>>end up costing on both sides...

>so enlighten us.

B P

unread,
Jun 3, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/3/98
to

On Tue, 02 Jun 98 19:29:09 GMT, ere...@NOSPAMkiva.net (Eric Evans)
wrote:

> Well, actually, that's confidential information. I did a pretty detailed

>cost analysis on it awhile back but had to have it suppressed because of it's
>proprietary info and I'm using it for the Entreprenuer DIM that I'm
>developing. I could tell you what law firms I contacted for my research but I
>wouldn't want you to bog them down by the hundreds of people who will
>undoubtably call them to verify the information. But suffice to say the
>information is out there for you to research and be amazed.

I see Eric
Not only does your name sound like Derek you make excuses like him
also. ;)

Bruce Gottfred

unread,
Jun 3, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/3/98
to


j...@bsfilter.com wrote:

> hahahaha, Bill for the first time , considering all i have read in
> all your , convoluted posts , you have finally made me laugh
> so hard i practically had an embolism . Can't help you about not
> meeting Derek, but if you wanted Joe as a Beer drinking buddy, You
> should have looked in Brooklyn, and NOT Atlanta, that's way too far
> south for this italio/irish mutt to be caught down there , heard they
> used to hang grease balls like me in the deep south, years ago, and
> being a Yankee well i am always afraid that the " deliverance" music
> might start playing , and maybe you might take a peculiar , "shine"
> to me <g>
> Joe

Hi Derek,

I think Bill's visualisation of your 'Joe' outfit as a set of Groucho glasses is
kinda lacking. I see it more as one of those incredibly intricate 'disguises' that
Inspector Clouseau would wear. He would inflate an artificial hump, put a fake
parrot on his shoulder, add an eyepatch, false teeth and talk with a funny accent.
Then no one would know who he was...

You continually tell us about your rough tough neighborhood and your rough tough
self. Tell us (ad nausium) about your Italian/Irish 'heritage'. You cut and paste
from some chemistry abstract and insert it in one of your rants to 'prove' that you
really are a bio-chemist. You butcher the normal rules of punctuation to (you
imagine) throw us off the scent even more.

But still you spout the Derek line, demonstrate the same enormous insecurities and
overcompensate for them the same way. The same arrogant "I'm better than you"
stance.

Well, no one's saying you can't do this, but don't expect anyone to believe you...

nobr...@unleesrjed.clampet

unread,
Jun 3, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/3/98
to

On Wed, 03 Jun 1998 10:09:11 -0400, Bruce Gottfred
<gott...@cyberus.ca> wrote:

>
>
>j...@bsfilter.com wrote:
>
>> hahahaha, Bill for the first time , considering all i have read in
>> all your , convoluted posts , you have finally made me laugh
>>

>> Joe
>
> Hi Derek,
hmm are mistaken but I'll run with this delusion I'm good to go
with humoring today

>I think Bill's visualisation of your 'Joe' outfit as a set of Groucho glasses is

>kinda lacking.>. He would inflate an artificial hump, put a fake


>parrot on his shoulder, add an eyepatch, false teeth and talk with a funny accent.
>Then no one would know who he was...

seems to have backfired since you have described me to a tee

>You continually tell us about your rough tough neighborhood and your rough tough
>self. Tell us (ad nausium) about your Italian/Irish 'heritage'.

You gots a problem wit dat <g> Incidentally i never said i was so
rough, (humble gene is expressing itself) i live in an area though
that the mafia has used alternately as a retirement area for old
mafiosa, ( the bay is right down the street, now you know what the
term, "sleeps with the fishes" pertains to.....forced mafia
retirement) and also as a recruiting ground. .....
hey wait a minute , there is NO mafia , that iis a cultural slander,
done by prosecutors in the court system to defame the respectability
of Honorable Italian Americans , like Angelo," the nook", Gelepie,
Tony " numb face" Alfonso. All pillars of the community as you can
see, <g>

You cut and paste
>from some chemistry abstract and insert it in one of your rants to 'prove' that you
>really are a bio-chemist. You butcher the normal rules of punctuation to (you

>imagine) throw us off the scent even more.n
nah i'm just lazy punctuation wise , that's why i have friends, that
proof read my tech papers

The field is Molecular Biology.Not Chemistry
If you had said Biochemistry you would have been close, but no prize
Preparation , both undergraduate, and graduate for Biochemistry is
light/ moderate on the Biology, but heavy on the chemistry ie
Molecular Biology students thankfully do not have to take a year of
graduate Physical chemistry , which requires 3 semesters of calculus
and possibly an elective advanced mathematics course, in differential
equations, although the last is not mandatory,

Preparation for Molecular Biology is heavy on Biology, ultra heavy
on Genetics/ Endocrinology/ Cellular, Developmental Biology, with
recent emphasis on field of paracrine, and autocrine signal
transduction. Of course there is overlap in the two fields in fact,
see below, one of the leading Biochemistry Journals is in fact a very
big forum for what are in essence Molecular Biology papers. .

All these fields are in certain ways stepping on each others toes. I
have friends in certain labs, where they had to devote whole staff
sections to cell bio, bio chem, molec bio and fill with appropriate
people/tech even though the lab may be investigating a question that
would traditionally be considered a purely Biochemistry question,
different tools for different ways to ask same question

Actually the only references i made was to previously confirmed
data/proven theory I gave limited experimental methods/findings ,
all the theory i gave would not be found in any abstract. which
contains a given investigators current summary of experimental
data/methods that was recently found/ and methods used in a summary
of the accompanying paper's data.. If you are familiar with abstracts
written for Molecular Biology Journals, say like the following ones, "
The Journal of Biological Chemistry" , " Molecular Cellular Biology",
and "Cell", the abstract of a paper , which is directly underneath the
title, and list of authors and their university affiliations, in case
you need to find one to look at,<g> contains at most 2-3 sentences of
theoretical knowledge to put the accompanying work in perspective, and
the rest of the abstract is filled with what we did, how we did it,
why we did it ie experimental data/methods summary, all told said
abstract might be 20-25 sentences long

Again what i gave you was no abstract , example: i did not say

" Phospholipid metabolism has been shown to induce differential signal
transduction pathways in response to various cellular/biochemical, and
molecular signal transduction effector stimuli in a variety of cell
types. We have used BALB/c 3t3 cells to generate a differential
activation response of a PKC (protein kinase C) iso form Gamma, in
response to the addition of the Phorbol Ester, TPA
( 12-0-tetradecanoylphorbol 13-acetate) following transfection and
expression of plamid BFR12-34 containing the EGF Rc ( Epidermal
Growth Factor Receptor) Following EGF activation of transfected
receptor,and 48 minute post EGF addition of TPA We were able to
separate the activated PKC iso form from cell membrane extracts using
HPLC, which showed differential kinase activation than usually
associated with TPA treatment "
..........yadda yadda this abstract would go on for at most 20 or so
sentences summarizing WHAT , HOW, these guys did what they did
discussions on why this is/maybe important are limited in detail to
the paper's discussion section

Oh , abstracts for MCB papers (Journal , Molecular Cellular Biology)
are typically but not always shorter than JBC and Cell abstracts


>But still you spout the Derek line, demonstrate the same enormous insecurities and
>overcompensate for them the same way. The same arrogant "I'm better than you"
>stance.
>>Well, no one's saying you can't do this, but don't expect anyone to believe you...
>-----------Bruce Gottfred----------------------
>Call me apathetic...
>I don't care.

Gee thought you wanted a clarification , . But hey i'm having FUN
wanna talk about electroporation of plamid efficency rates
???????!!!!!!hehehe Anything else like to know, what my shirt size is?
when /where you can send me cash, or your girlfriends ?? <g> oh well
nice tag at end of your post though

Joe
hmmm something tells me i am going to get the height of FTHX
intellectual response to this post, the beloved highbrow.." snip,
......yawn " response

Message has been deleted

JackyO

unread,
Jun 3, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/3/98
to

Bruce Gottfred wrote:
>
> j...@bsfilter.com wrote:
>
> > hahahaha, Bill for the first time , considering all i have read in
> > all your , convoluted posts , you have finally made me laugh
> > so hard i practically had an embolism . Can't help you about not
> > meeting Derek, but if you wanted Joe as a Beer drinking buddy, You
> > should have looked in Brooklyn, and NOT Atlanta, that's way too far
> > south for this italio/irish mutt to be caught down there , heard they
> > used to hang grease balls like me in the deep south, years ago, and
> > being a Yankee well i am always afraid that the " deliverance" music
> > might start playing , and maybe you might take a peculiar , "shine"
> > to me <g>
> > Joe
>
> Hi Derek,
>
> I think Bill's visualisation of your 'Joe' outfit as a set of Groucho glasses is
> kinda lacking. I see it more as one of those incredibly intricate 'disguises' that
> Inspector Clouseau would wear. He would inflate an artificial hump, put a fake

> parrot on his shoulder, add an eyepatch, false teeth and talk with a funny accent.
> Then no one would know who he was...
>
> You continually tell us about your rough tough neighborhood and your rough tough
> self. Tell us (ad nausium) about your Italian/Irish 'heritage'. You cut and paste

> from some chemistry abstract and insert it in one of your rants to 'prove' that you
> really are a bio-chemist. You butcher the normal rules of punctuation to (you
> imagine) throw us off the scent even more.
>
> But still you spout the Derek line, demonstrate the same enormous insecurities and
> overcompensate for them the same way. The same arrogant "I'm better than you"
> stance.
>
> Well, no one's saying you can't do this, but don't expect anyone to believe you...
>
> -----------Bruce Gottfred----------------------
>
> Call me apathetic...
> I don't care.
>
> --------...@cyberus.ca-------------------

LOL !!!!

Derek Smart

unread,
Jun 4, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/4/98
to

On Wed, 03 Jun 1998 10:09:11 -0400, Bruce Gottfred <gott...@cyberus.ca> wrote:

>
>
>j...@bsfilter.com wrote:
>
>> hahahaha, Bill for the first time , considering all i have read in
>> all your , convoluted posts , you have finally made me laugh
>> so hard i practically had an embolism . Can't help you about not
>> meeting Derek, but if you wanted Joe as a Beer drinking buddy, You
>> should have looked in Brooklyn, and NOT Atlanta, that's way too far
>> south for this italio/irish mutt to be caught down there , heard they
>> used to hang grease balls like me in the deep south, years ago, and
>> being a Yankee well i am always afraid that the " deliverance" music
>> might start playing , and maybe you might take a peculiar , "shine"
>> to me <g>
>> Joe
>
> Hi Derek,
>
>I think Bill's visualisation of your 'Joe' outfit as a set of Groucho glasses is

er, please send Joe private email or ICQ and authenticate his identity before
you jump to conclusions. If you're taking the word of these degenerates that
Joe==DS, then you're no better than they are.

Anyway who thinks that with an ego like mine I would hide behind an alias,
doesn't know the first thing about pride.

Message has been deleted

ald...@hotmail.com

unread,
Jun 4, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/4/98
to

In article <357774ea...@news.mindspring.com>,
nobr...@unleesrjed.Clampet (j...@bsfilter.com) wrote:
>

<snip convincing academic argument (pay attention Bill, fthx)>
<snip abstract>

> Gee thought you wanted a clarification , . But hey i'm having FUN
> wanna talk about electroporation of plamid efficency rates
> ???????!!!!!!hehehe Anything else like to know, what my shirt size is?
> when /where you can send me cash, or your girlfriends ?? <g> oh well
> nice tag at end of your post though


Not that I don't enjoy seeing the innocent get burned or shot at in these
threads, but I'm entirely convinced that j...@bsfilter.com is NOT Derek Smart.
From a literary point of view, the two have as much in common as Steinbeck to
Big Bird. As for intelligence - the gap is cosmically larger.

The unique aspect of joe's prose is that he's decided to manipulate the
English language into his own social and personal context. I don't see any
sloppiness in his writing. In fact, it's quite daring and intelligent to
alter conventions if it helps to define who you are. I also find that joe is
able to express *what's on his mind* a lot clearer than other writers because
of his particular lexical and syntactical abuse. Joe would certainly be able
to compose a proper (and yet, boring) post if he wanted to. I doubt that a
microencephalic person like Derek could fake a online personality like joe.
It's very hard to pretend to be someone more intelligent than you are - as
I've already seen in a few aliases here, it goes the other way around.

Take for example joe's highly inflectional ability to flame and rant. Does
anyone ever recall Derek producing a proper flame? The man couldn't flame
someone if he was given a can of gas and box of matches. Raise your hand if
you think that 'yo moma wears seven-eleven army boots' was even remotely a
mediocre flame. Unless it's refried spam or a repetitive diatribe against
Bill Huffman, I don't see Derek capable of connecting a series of meaningful
sentences into a paragraph. There's no profundity in Derek's prose - it's
vapid, vacant, vacuous, vague, vain, vaporous, vegetal, vengeful, venomous,
vindictive, virulent, vitreous, vitriolic, vociferous and vulgar.

I now understand why joe bothers to defend himself. It's certainly not a
pleasant feeling to be called Derek Smart (boy, do I know). Be realistic
people! If you're going accuse joe of being anyone, at least pick someone who
wouldn't confuse a Novell certificate with a PhD. Maybe he's Ben, or Bruce,
or Eric, or Gary, or even, me.


Aldus Mayhew


-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

ald...@hotmail.com

unread,
Jun 4, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/4/98
to

In article <199806040338...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
ft...@aol.com (Fthx) wrote:

<snipped list of arguments from the great archiver, fthx>

Well, we base our analytical observations on a different theory. It's stuff
that I don't really want to get too involved in because the evidence you're
presenting is circumstantial and open to debate. I guess, so is mine. Anyhow,
I was interested in joe's unique literary style and overall intelligence and
found there was reason enough in that to consider he wasn't Derek. The points
you made about his earlier posts become trivial if you consider everybody's
posting style and attitude over a long period - including yours. Some people
mellow, others (like Derek) remain the same or get worse. But, I certainly
appreciate your arguments. You'll let me know when you get your box of oat
bran, right?


> The big remaining question is whether "Aldus" could be anyone we know. If
> so, I think the only possibility left is BaZ, who was also a brilliant foe
> of Cleve.


I'm not BaZ. Circle pointed this out. If you take any random post by BaZ and
compare it to one of mine, you'll notice that the content, style, syntax and
vocabulary are entirely different. Neither post would be better, funnier,
etc, but different. Who I am is about as significant as who you are [fthx?]
in this online game. Who really cares as long as Derek gets pulverized,
right? After all, I could even be joe. Now *that* would be funny.

Also, I think you misunderstood my posts to Cleve (if that's what you were
refering to). I am his greatest fan. Derek Smart becomes a banal subject when
someone with the poetic insanity of Cleve is present. But I can understand
why some people are more fascinated with Derek. Derek is the epitome of raw
stupidity - a blithering idiot wandering aimlessly through a minefield with a
grenade up his ass. For some nutfuck reason, he believes he's part of an
elite group of people known as 'game programmers,' and thinks he wields
immense power over the people he addresses. This is like someone without a
degree in medicine trying to portray themselves as a doctor. Some frauds know
enough terminology to be dangerous and are quite convincing, but Derek can't
even display a rudimentary knowledge of programming to his brethren. These
frauds eventually stumble, get ridiculed and run away in shame. Derek just
hasn't yet figured out the 'running away' part. There's a simple guideline to
follow when determining the ability or skill that a person has in their field
- if they get angry over any trifling matter, they don't know what they're
doing. Sounds like anyone from work?

On the other hand, Cleve is a literary genius and an undefeatable debater,
able to tackle anything thrown at him. Cleve's a verbal wood-chipper - toss
words and theories to him and he'll chew them up and spit them back at you.
He is, actually, very sane and the most remarkable proof of this is that,
unlike the typical usenet kook, he is able to keep his posts just at the
borderline of racial and political offensiveness (and does it by humourously
exaggerating the offensive material). Does he take himself seriously? No.

Libertarians may be good at figuring out the motives of people in photos, but
communists are better at figuring out their motives from Usenet posts. :-)


Aldus

Derek Smart

unread,
Jun 4, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/4/98
to

On Thu, 04 Jun 1998 02:31:25 GMT, ald...@hotmail.com wrote:


>I now understand why joe bothers to defend himself. It's certainly not a
>pleasant feeling to be called Derek Smart (boy, do I know). Be realistic
>people! If you're going accuse joe of being anyone, at least pick someone who
>wouldn't confuse a Novell certificate with a PhD. Maybe he's Ben, or Bruce,
>or Eric, or Gary, or even, me.
>
>
>Aldus Mayhew

All this from an idiot who came online and posted several lies and slanderous
posts saying that we were old friends from school until of course I publicly
busted him and his lies turned to a confession.

Anyone who missed the thread, let me know, I have them archived right here or
you can search on DejaNews using his email address.

I rest my case.

bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com

unread,
Jun 4, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/4/98
to

In article <199806040338...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
ft...@aol.com (Fthx) wrote:
>
> [snipped analysis by the great troll Aldus]
>
> Taken at face value, I don't really agree with your mental assessment of
"joe"
> (whose old rants and obsessions were pure Derek idiocy), but some of the
recent
> evidence (see below) has really turned me around on the joe == Derek
question.
> I think I have to agree with Eric Evans (?), that with the simultaneous
> appearance of Derek, "Joe" and Cleve, we're witnessing the Golden Age of
> Usenet. Which is not to say that it isn't a bit frightening, and that I
don't
> still think Cleve is a bore.
>
> As for the evidence, I had noticed the following:
>
> 1) In contrast to the original datetime stamp evidence, which had been
> remarkable in showing a "mesh" between Derek and "joe", the more recent
posting
> patterns had become somewhat muddled (though Derek tended to be less active,
so
> it was harder to tell). At this point I'm ready to count the earlier
evidence
> as a big coincidence.

Well of course, Derek could also just be changing his pattern and switching
back and forth more often after he saw the evidence you presented.

> 2) Some of "joe"'s story had finally begun to add up (I won't get into the
> details, since some of it I never publicized anyway). I can't begin to
judge
> how much of his persona is B.S., but some of the things that had previously
> looked like weak Derek fabrications started to make more sense.
> 3) The growing pile of posts made it harder to believe that Derek could keep
> the farce going, because Derek is such a legendary screwup. The original
> collection was much easier to attribute to Derek, because "joe" hadn't been
> around long, and hadn't faced scrutiny.

Derek is a screw up when fantasy must deal with reality. Derek is a
screw up when he must associate his subjective opinion or desires to
the facts. Derek is a screw up where the tire meets the road. However,
Derek is an expert web weaver. If the web is never tested by reality,
it holds together very well and can be quite stable.

> 4) The "abandonware" B.S. from joe simply didn't look like a Derek belief.
> Everything previous that I had studied fit with Derek living his alternate
> personality as an abusive gamer. Since Derekological Psychology is such a
> difficult subject, it's hard to arrive at any firm conclusions, but the
> abandonware rants didn't make enough sense "as Derek".

I would agree with this one. However, it is an idea that is kooky enough
to have come from Derek.

> 5) Derek's recent series of obsessive posts about Unreal put a dent in the
> "alternate character" hypothesis, since it gave an unprecedented example of
> Derek flaming away repeatedly and uselessly about a game completely
unrelated
> to BC3K. "joe"'s style is a bit different.
> 6) Relatively few of the "detractors" ever bought into the theory. I trust
> Bill Huffman a lot for his brilliant insights, but can't disregard the
opinions
> of other Derekologists.

Of course, I can't say for sure that it is Derek. At the time I made
the post assuming it was Derek, I did for a few reasons. First, the
rant seemed to have Derek written all over it. Secondly, it was an
opportunity for a very funny post. Thirdly, Derek had been making stupid
claims for months that BaZ was Fthx and that I was Sixball (BP), etc.

> 7) "Aldus" demonstrated the power of counter-trolling, which surely "joe"
has
> enjoyed a bit himself.

8) I would like to add what is probably the most convincing argument,
to me, that Derek is joe@bsfilter. Joe came out of the blue and started
spouting off old Derek BS and threatened to murder the detractors in his
post that talked about how cheap it was to hire hitmen in his old
neighborhood. This kind of stuff just didn't seem to make sense coming
from a guy out of the blue. There was also the early exchange between him
and Derek regarding the "meet me for a beer in New York" that seemed very
contrived. So, that's why I think that Derek is joe@bsfilter or at least
he already had some connection with Derek previously.

> Which is not to say that there hasn't been fresh evidence of the connection
> (most notably the dick/suck/fuck/mother/father thing). But I'm no longer
> convinced that "joe" is Derek. Given that Derek has set an unmatchable
> standard for being firmly convinced that I was BaZ, it hardly matters either
> way, but it's been quite a story.


>
> The big remaining question is whether "Aldus" could be anyone we know. If
so,
> I think the only possibility left is BaZ, who was also a brilliant foe of

> Cleve. I think it's a relative unknown (someone who has been away from the
> flamewars for a long time), but either way we've seen some fantastic posts,
> including the recent "flatulence" one.
>
> fthx, PhD (Derekology)

Bill Huffman, PhD, dissertation "The Art of Recognizing the Groucho
Marx Disguise", from (Sorry, too personal)

Sparticus the Evil Gladiator

unread,
Jun 4, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/4/98
to

Derek Smart wrote:
>
> On Thu, 04 Jun 1998 02:31:25 GMT, ald...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> >I now understand why joe bothers to defend himself. It's certainly not a
> >pleasant feeling to be called Derek Smart (boy, do I know). Be realistic
> >people! If you're going accuse joe of being anyone, at least pick someone who
> >wouldn't confuse a Novell certificate with a PhD. Maybe he's Ben, or Bruce,
> >or Eric, or Gary, or even, me.
> >
> >
> >Aldus Mayhew
>
> All this from an idiot who came online and posted several lies and slanderous
> posts saying that we were old friends from school until of course I publicly
> busted him and his lies turned to a confession.
>
> Anyone who missed the thread, let me know, I have them archived right here or
> you can search on DejaNews using his email address.
>
> I rest my case.
>
> Derek Smart, Ph.D.
> Designer/Lead Developer
> Battlecruiser:3000AD
>

All this from an idiot who came online and continues posts lies about
his education and his alleged work, as well as slanderous posts claiming
that he is a game designer, thereby slandering real game designers.

Anyone who missed any of his lies, just check with fthx who has the
entire trail of distortions and falsehoods conveniently archived on the
web.

I rest my case.

Yet another gamer sick of Derek Smart

nobr...@unleesrjed.clampet

unread,
Jun 4, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/4/98
to

On Thu, 04 Jun 1998 16:10:32 GMT, bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com
wrote:

>In article <199806040338...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,

>>

>

>8) I would like to add what is probably the most convincing argument,
>to me, that Derek is joe@bsfilter. Joe came out of the blue and started
>spouting off old Derek BS and threatened to murder the detractors in his
>post that talked about how cheap it was to hire hitmen in his old
>neighborhood. This kind of stuff just didn't seem to make sense coming
>from a guy out of the blue. There was also the early exchange between him
>and Derek regarding the "meet me for a beer in New York" that seemed very
>contrived. So, that's why I think that Derek is joe@bsfilter or at least
>he already had some connection with Derek previously.

>


>Bill Huffman, PhD, dissertation "The Art of Recognizing the Groucho
>Marx Disguise", from (Sorry, too personal)
>
>-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

Nope, never once met him. In regards to your mention of the post where
I complemented Derek for fixing up the game, and offered to buy him a
beer if he was in my neck of the woods, Funny you should mention
that, almost fortuitous , that you should in fact.

You and others at the time were beginning drum beating the Joe = DS ,
bs. And i believe either you or fthx, or riboflavin said something
like well how does Derek take himself out for a beer , or something
about their conversations being very one sided. This was generally due
to Derek's pleasant response that he would if was in area, as he had a
house in the NY area. Well you and the rest of the Huff gang
jumped on the lies lies band wagon. Remember ?

Perhaps you should consult a post by Fthx yesterday, my friend , where

he obtained a Derek Smart business card from someone at E3.
Funny thing about that card, it proves Derek was at E3, and also
proves he previously was telling the truth. As it lists a phone number
in the 516 area code. So Derek did not lie about a New York area house
now did he?

Perhaps you are sweating now Bill , because if he didn't lie about
that, the derek vs Bilbo the Huff bullshit score is 2 truths Derek,
goose egg and all bullshit for Billbo the huff. More importantly
aren't you a little more concerned that Derek does have his degree as
he says and is just the type of person that can give a 2 days tampon's
worth of caring whether you or me, or anyone else believes him?

As for comming out of the blue , hey we all had to crawl out from
under some rock now , at some time. This is an experience that you i
know have intimate knowledge of. Or perhaps you have ventured far and
wide within this vast world, experienced much, lived life to it's
fullest, tasted the bounty of life and lustful buxom vixens and orgies
of debauchery and forgot your crevice slithering days... well and
then again , we're talking about you Bill,....right? Guess you choose
to stay under the rock. Nothing like stickin by your "HOOD",
right Billbo my man !<g>

Pertaining to hit men, gee i never knew anyone held the copyrights on
creative metaphors and feats of descriptive literary musings , i
should have checked., next time I'll venture down to the park, breeze
past your rock , see if your under,....... i mean home and ask ya.
Speaking of hit men , why is it so inconceivable that I know from
whence I speak. I do live in an area that John Gotti had a few clubs
in, not the bergan hunt and fish club mobster hall of fame , which is
in Queens , but he had a few clubs few blocks from me. Met the guy
coming out of a bakery here many years ago, didn't have clue who he
was, just thought the suit he was wearing was way too expensive for
the shitty haircut , and abundance of obnoxious Guinea jewelry he was
wearing. There are always ass holes in all neighborhoods that do way
too much Columbian marching powder and proceed to perforate themselves
a new nostril, and an empty wallet, and stupidly broadcast to the
world ," for 500 bucks i'd wack your wife and some horse's meat "
Since i am an upstanding citizen, hahaha i of course would refuse ,
such offers especially from a man who didn't distinguish between
Homicide and Equestrian masturbation.

That doesn't mean i did not hear 'tell" of such folk. Nor does it mean
i was remotely serious. Perhaps it was a big ammunition flame boast
, a flamboast if you will. It wasn't like i was hiring anyone to storm
over to the park, and kick over your home .

Finally why don't you check some posts i made early this morning in
the flightsim group about a certain piece of info, that someone that
would live in Florida ala Dr. Smart , would have zero knowledge of.
This info pertains to some local current events , local for me that
is.

Bill what can i say, there are those of us that don't take kindly
whether in print, or in person to being ticked. Is there a common
thread to how Derek, a perfect stranger and i react, perhaps, not my
concern really, i do like his game, though . If you really want to
make an issue over what obscenities, and in what
order/frequency/context and with what social metaphors, black
humor , and condescending displays him and I associate them. go ahead
I guess i'll blow a few fuses on your prozac dispenser and just say
that perhaps the only thing i share in common with Derek is that great
minds think alike. Bill .....you okay?............there's smoke coming
out from under your rock man....shit now i done it.
Joe

bill.h...@sandiegoca.ncr.com

unread,
Jun 4, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/4/98
to

In article <199806032012...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
ft...@aol.com (Fthx) wrote:
>
> Bill Huffman wrote about the "bears on his profession" stuff:
>
> > [snip]
>
> Awhile ago I received an unsolicited email from someone saying they had
picked
> up a Derek business card at a trade show, and the information on it was:
>
> Derek K. Smart, Ph.D.
> President, 3000ad (TM)
>
> 8306 Mills Drive, Suite 329
> Miami FL 33183
>
> 305-273-9875 -or-
> 516-484-xxxx
> 305-273-9876 (fax)
>
> I've disguised the New York number because I don't know if the Taco Supreme
> Commander has published it elsewhere (as he has the other information, which
>is
> in the manual).
>
> I look forward to seeing a judge react to the obvious use of this phony PhD
> credential for business purposes, by someone filing a frivolous lawsuit.
>Since
> the vapor lawsuit is in an infinite "planning" stage right now (the libel
>suit
> being groundless on its face, and the anti-flaming suit awaiting repeal of a
> constitutional amendment), I'll never see it, but I'll laugh every day about
> the "lesson" Derek has taught me.

Fair is fair, Fthx. I told everyone the lesson I learned and will never
forget. (Fix any holes in the wall before someone comes over for a
visit or you might have to change your shoes.) What lesson did you learn?
Don't tell me you forgot because, I won't believe that, and it has to
be an expensive one, too.

> http://www.angelfire.com/ca/PhDFraud/
> http://members.aol.com/fthx/bc3k/Derekology
>
> fthx

It is loading more messages.
0 new messages