I just belatedly realized why adults can't communicate with Jolly Roger & nospam & Alan Baker & Snit - because they're too far to the left on the Dunning-Kruger scale

[arlen holder]

This is important to the groups that the posters below post to.

I post a lot of facts.
Well verified. Well cited. Easily validated facts.

Facts.

Those facts are often challenged by this group of canonical naysayers:
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/mehGxIGcoa8/MoxCZ8XcAwAJ>

That naysaying of easily validated facts stretches a thread ad infinitum.
Simply because these posters deny that facts exist outside their spheres.

Why?
Why can't I communicate with these people?
o Are they so dumb as to be un communicative with adults?
o Are they just pulling out leg and toying with us?
Or, is it actually far _deeper_ than that?

I think - I just realized - belatedly - belatedly by years - why.
It will make _all_ the difference in how I respond to them in the future.

I just belatedly realized why sentient logical adults just can't
communicate with the likes of Jolly Roger & nospam & Alan Baker & Snit (et.
al).

It may simply be that they're the epitome of the left-side DK effect:
o I used to think it had to be that they were pulling our leg all the time,
o Or that, they were just incredibly (unfathomably) stupid.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/18ARDsEOPzM/veU8FwAjBQAJ>

But I think, it seems, perhaps, the problem is actually far worse
o It may be that they are the epitome of the left-side DK effect

In which case, no sentient adult can _ever_ carry on a normal conversation
with them, if that conversation contains even the simplest of known facts.

Examples abound, where I'll just point to two very recent examples.
In these examples (as usual) it only takes 10 seconds to prove them wrong.

I don't mind people having strong opinions, mind you - opinions are fine.
But to repeatedly & steadfastly claim that facts are wrong - is strange.

Adults - at least intelligent adults - don't generally claim facts are wrong.
Especially when it only takes ten seconds to prove the facts are correct.

Why do people like Alan Baker, BK, Jolly Roger, nospam, do such odd things?
o I used to think it's just that they're unfathomably incredibly stupid, or,
o Perhaps they're just playing silly games for their own amusement.

I've _always_ wondered _why_ people like nospam & Jolly Roger do this.
I belatedly realized it's because they're _perfect_ left-side DK specimens!

Example 1:
o nospam *insists* that Apple did NOT add throttling software to the iPhone X;
o And yet, well-published facts easily show they did (long ago, in fact).
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wbCbVX48E5M>

Example 2:
o Alan Baker insists a link to a Usenet post is not "proof" of fact;
o And yet, that Usenet post _contains_ links to the very statements from Apple!
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/oulJsYSmDDM/knn09aTWFQAJ>

Example 3:
o Jolly Roger insists that iOS has the import/export ICS file capability;
o And yet, anyone _instantly_ can see that it doesn't even come close.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/OzUOmgJLmZs/MVz0tjHUFQAJ>

Example 4:
o Both Jolly Roger & nospam insist that a signature must be added outside of VPN.
o And yet, it's trivial to prove otherwise in seconds - with a single simple test.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/oulJsYSmDDM/bOCAndO4FQAJ>

Example 5:
o Snit insists that his video shows iOS graphing wifi signal strength over time;
o And yet, anyone _instantly_ can see that he never looked at the abscissa.
<<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0/qSXecrnZAQAJ>

The examples abound...
o The DK crew make statements as if they actually comprehend basic facts.
o And yet, they just don't.

It takes only ten seconds to prove each of these people dead wrong.
o Using just simple easily verified facts.
o All the time.

It boggles my mind that people can appear to be _that_ incredibly stupid.
It actually bothers me because I had more faith in adults than they deserve.

As most of you know, I've been studying Apple Apologists for years, but
only recently did I realize that it's not so much that they're incredibly
stupid, but that they don't _realize_ they're incredibly stupid.

They constantly make claims that are easily disproved in mere seconds.

It's not a problem that they both hold such strong convictions.
o The problem is that they claim all facts are lies
o Simply because _they_ can't comprehend even the simplest of facts

*That they don't realize they're _perfect_ left-side DK specimens!*
They _think_ they comprehend facts - and yet - they prove - they don't.

Every single time.

I used to think there were only two possibilities:
o Either they really are that incredibly unfathomably stupid, or,
o They're just pulling our leg (all the time).

But now, I just realized, they're picture-perfect left-side DK specimens!

NOTE: Most people don't comprehend what the DK effect entails.
The DK effect is a "skills self-assessment" effect.

In terms of nospam & Jolly Roger, those with the least skills tend to
overrate their skill set and to trust their judgment far more than more
rationale people would dream of doing.

While I've always said I'm only of average intelligence (if even that),
this belated realization of both Jolly Roger and nospam exhibit, explains
why they always appear to claim easily verified facts are "lies" or
"trolls" when those easily verified facts disagree with their religious
bias.

Here's a direct quote of what effect both Jolly Roger & nospam exhibit:
"the DunningĄVKruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people
of low ability have illusory superiority and mistakenly assess
their cognitive ability as greater than it is"
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect>

NOTE: Most of us are in the middle - and some even to the right; where
everyone has a cognitive bias when self-assessing skills. This cognitive
bias spans both sides, from self assessing our own skill set, to assessing
how much effort it takes others to gain our skill set. Those to the left
vastly overestimate both their skills and the effort it takes others to
gain their skills - whereas those to the right tend to underestimate their
skills and to underestimate the effort it takes to attain their skills.
Those in the middle are the most balanced in self assessment of skills.

In short, I've just realized that the problem with these people is not
o that they can't comprehend even the simplest of facts, nor is it
o that they are just constantly pulling our leg for amusement.
It's likely literally that they are the epitome of the left-side DK effect.

That is:
o They self assess themselves so highly, that facts are not needed.
o When challenged on facts, they simply deny the fact.

*They actually _believe_ their denials of basic facts - are correct.*
They're literally incapable of self-assessing themselves on that regard.

In summary, not only have I been dealing with them incorrectly all along
(in that I had assumed they possessed a 'normal' mind), but the entire
approach is quite different once I realize that they are, literally,
exactly what the Dunning-Kruger effects speaks about with the left-side
examples.

*This belated realization will affect how I treat them in the future.*

(I will no longer attempt to discuss basic facts with them - since -
it's clear - they don't appear to possess the cognitive skills to assess
even the simplest of basic easily validated & verified facts.)

[Wolf K]

On 2019-01-16 11:33, arlen holder wrote:
[...]
> Or, is it actually far_deeper_ than that?
[...]

It's your use of "child" as an insult.

And your notion that insults will persuade people to agree with you.

Have frabjous day,

--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
People worry that computers will get too smart
and take over the world, but the real problem is
that they’re too stupid and they’ve already taken over
the world (Pedro Domingos)

[arlen holder]

On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 14:05:25 -0500, Wolf K wrote:

> It's your use of "child" as an insult.

Hi Wolf K,
As you know, I've often referred to you as a child, so that alone makes my
response to you a bit difficult - in that I'm going to explain my tactics -
which - is always a mistake since you will try to test me (as you've done
in the past so many times I can't count them).

Still - I stay true to my stratgegy and tactics nonetheless:
o Strategy: Learn from & add appreciably to the overall tribal knowledge
o Tactics: Deal with the trolls as if they were fifth-grade bullies.

Notice that I frontally confront the bullies - such as you are - Wolf K.
(And never think that I forget - although my tactics are ALWAYS to mirror
that of the poster I'm responding to - in order to coax them into behaving
like a sensible reasonable adult should).

Hence ... I agree with you fully Wolf. K.
I really do.

In fact, I'll highlight my agreement, and my chastity:
*I apologize for mixing Dunning-Kruger effects with the mind of a child.*

They're different.

While I have been pondering, for decades, what makes some Usenet posters
utterly immune to facts (e.g., Diesel, Snit, Colonel Edmund J. Burke, John
Doe, Nomen Nomescu, Shadow, Good Guy, Mr. Man-wai Chang, David B., %,
Anonymous, Cybe R Wizard, etc. - the list is huge so allow me to stop)...

I used to think most this immunity to fact was due to one of two reasons:
o They're either just toying with us (for their own childish amusement), or
o They're really _that_ unfathomably stupid.

And I pretty much tested out my premises over the decades, for example:
o Experiments proving [certain] Usenet groups are filled to the brim with children
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/b0DrfrsRh24/ODQneWFEBAAJ>

Notice ... up until now, I've been assuming poster who can't handle fact
o Are either adults with the child of a fifth grader, or
o Adults who are unfathomably stupid.

The problem with that second item is that the stupidity is unfathomable.
As unfathomable as the thought process of the "lemon-juice bankrobber".

Obviously the first item is easy to understand, where my "tactic" to deal
with those who deny the most basic of adult discussions is to make it "less
fun" (which you, yourself, have been the target of - but so has Rene
Lamontagne, Frank Slootweg, Dan Purgert, Char Jackson, etc.).

To summarize, for the "childish" people who get their enjoyment out of
childish toying with Usenet posters, I simply attempt to "make it less fun"
for them.

Here's an example, from today, but such examples of childishness abound:
o What is the factual truth about PRIVACY differences or similarities between the Android & iOS mobile phone ecosystems?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/MiZixhidmOs/4p_ahPbSFQAJ>
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/MiZixhidmOs/Zh3cjawBFgAJ>

Some, of course, like Char Jackson and you, Wolf K, will utterly _insist_
on their God-given right to troll - but I have noticed that the incidence
of people like you insisting on your God-given right to troll goes down the
less fun I make it for you (in that I generally point out that I don't have
to prove you act like a child - because you do that for me by what you
post).

I simply point it out, for example, in this random case:
o Why does X constantly prove that all he can do, is play his silly fifth-grade games?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/irbuhYwQz9g/rVcddlu0AgAJ>

Having explained that the mind of a child is easily understood, what has
_always_ eluded me was the mind of the remaining posters who appear to
never comprehend simple basic facts.

For example:
o Would you concur that these are "positive counterfactuals"?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/MwGH8XcCRtQ/oenUeCJwAwAJ>

These posters are fewer than the children type I listed above.
Most of these posters have an almost "religious" like zeal.
o Often they deny facts that don't fit into their religious belief system
o Often, they promulgate completely false propositions

Two simple examples are these (where these examples abound):
o Why do the [some people] call all facts they don't like, trolls?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/FZVR227jn4g/tq_vJhGpAAAJ>

o What is wrong with the Apologists that they deny even what Apple admitted?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/fyL1cQUVCp0/2s_5ulpSBgAJ>

Up until today, I actually _thought_ these people were simply either
o Toying with us (in which case, facts should make it "less fun"), or
o Incredibly stupid (in which case, facts should have an impact).

However, the realization, today, that they're actually suffering from
Dunning-Kruger effects of the left side (note, everyone falls asunder to
the DK effect - where the left side is the canonical "lemon juice bank
robber" example) means that I must handle these DK folks differently.

How do you handle someone with left-side DK differently?
o You can't assume they're "toying" with us (they're actually serious)
o You can't just assume they're "stupid" either (they are - but it's worse)

What you have to do is realize they're fundamentally DIFFERENT.
o They actually _believe_ facts are wrong - and, sadly, far worse,
o No amount of facts will ever change them from that belief system.

I used to say that these people believe in their intuition more than they
believe in evidence to the contrary - which is - in a way - pretty much the
case - but it's - sadly - far worse than that - in that - they can't be
fixed.

That is, no amount of fact will change their minds.
Ever.

It's not that they're toying with us & it's not (only) that they're stupid.

They're not actually capable of processing facts.
Just as the "lemon juice bank robber" wasn't capable of processing them.

*The main point is that I've been trying to _reason_ with these people!*
o That's why many threads are 10x longer than they need to be.

But I've only today realized - they can not be reasoned with!
o It's NOT they're toying with us (they actually _believe_ what they say!)
o It's not even that they're stupid (yes, they are, but it's far worse!)

Said in a slightly humorous vein...
o No amount of fact will change that they think all facts are wrong.
o They're incapable of processing facts because they think they can.

By way of apology, I should have been more tuned to their problems.
o They're perhaps NOT children, and,
o They're certainly stupid - but their stupidity can't possibly be fixed

That is, facts will _never_ work.
That! Was my epiphany.

And That. Changes how I respond in the future.
(HINT: Threads will be far shorter as a result - and that's a good thing.)

[arlen holder]

On 16 Jan 2019 19:47:16 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

_THIS IS A RESPONSE TO JOLLY ROGER IN THE THREAD BELOW_
(which I copy here as an instructive style of the new response system).
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/oulJsYSmDDM/Hkza_FM8CAAJ>

Hi Jolly Roger,

We're going to have far shorter discussions, moving forward.
(And that's a good thing for everyone, including for me.)

I always strive to understand the person whom I'm dealing with.
But your actions have always defied my studied comprehension.

The fact is that I used to think that you could only have been either:
o Just toying with us by incessantly fabricating imaginary functionality
o Or, that you were unfathomably stupid in not comprehending facts.

But now I realize, sadly, it's likely to be far worse than that.

Far worse indeed.
o Sure, you prove you're incredibly stupid - but it's far worse than that;
o You literally _believe_ that what you just proposed will actually work.

Just like the lemon juice robber believed it would work for him.
o No amount of actual fact (no matter how basic) will sway you;
o So I will no longer try to convince you using facts.

Fact is...
o I've wasted my time (& everyone's time) laboriously providing facts:
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/MwtyT7BdxF4>

[Wolf K]

On 2019-01-16 14:45, arlen holder wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 14:05:25 -0500, Wolf K wrote:
>
>> It's your use of "child" as an insult.
> Hi Wolf K,
> As you know, I've often referred to you as a child, so that alone makes my
> response to you a bit difficult - in that I'm going to explain my tactics -
> which - is always a mistake since you will try to test me (as you've done
> in the past so many times I can't count them).

[...]

It's difficult only because you have a problem imagining how other
people respond to your posts. You've explained your tactics ad nauseam.
Repetition doesn't improve the explanation.

Have a frabjous day,

[Jasen Betts]

On 2019-01-16, arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> We're going to have far shorter discussions, moving forward.

If the goal is shorer discussions you're wasting words.
Other then length what does "moving forward" add to the sentence?

--
When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it.

[William Unruh]

On 2019-01-17, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
> On 2019-01-16, arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:
>
>> We're going to have far shorter discussions, moving forward.
>
> If the goal is shorer discussions you're wasting words.
> Other then length what does "moving forward" add to the sentence?

It gives the lie to the rest of the sentence.

>

[Cybe R. Wizard]

It is also nonsensical if we are to believe that, "moving forward,"
refers to doing so in time since there currently is no other way to
move in that particular partial medium.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
We are all traveling forward in time at the rate of one second per
second.

[Diesel]

"Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r...@WizardsTower.invalid>
news:20190117012107.1f46b2e6@WizardsTower Thu, 17 Jan 2019 07:21:07

GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 06:59:27 -0000 (UTC)
> William Unruh <un...@invalid.ca> wrote:
>
>> On 2019-01-17, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:
>> > On 2019-01-16, arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> We're going to have far shorter discussions, moving forward.
>> >
>> > If the goal is shorer discussions you're wasting words.
>> > Other then length what does "moving forward" add to the
>> > sentence?
>>
>> It gives the lie to the rest of the sentence.
>>
> It is also nonsensical if we are to believe that, "moving
> forward," refers to doing so in time since there currently is no
> other way to move in that particular partial medium.
>
> Cybe R. Wizard

One must also consider the fact Arlen hasn't solved their mapping a
local drive letter to Android internal/external memory, either. Far
too adult for them to apologize and get the help they wanted, for
free. Instead, they'd rather continue with petty insults and name
calling and proceed to make a complete arse of themselves as they
tried and failed, numerous times, to mount a drive letter for their
android device. That's some uber smart thinking on their part,
wouldn't you agree? :)


--
Visit https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php (10/10 WOT)
MID: <XnsA9B7A8...@DKrpqvfHsgf33.8qcO1vJpVCMaP>
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=154631875900

4) Good guys are always good looking.

[arlen holder]

On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 23:14:44 -0000 (UTC), Diesel wrote:

> they tried and failed, numerous times, to mount a drive letter
> for their android device.

Hehhehheh...

THANK YOU Diesel for perfectly proving my very point!
o I don't have to prove you lack even the most basic of comprehension
o I only need to refer to your own words (which prove the point for me).

*Your post is a _perfect_ example for the left-side DK cognitive bias!*
o It's not that you are pulling our leg (you actually _believe_ what you write!)
o And, it's not that you're unfathomably stupid (you are - but it's worse, sadly)
... the sad fact is ...
o We _always_ had this capability - we were simply trying to improve it!

That! You can't possibly comprehend.
o We _always_ had drive-letter mapping (Always!)
o We only wished to _improve_ upon the process.

You misunderstand something as _simple_ as that!
o You _think_ you comprehend - just as the lemon-juice robber did!
o Where no amount of "lemon-juice" chemistry fact - will change your mind.

You are the epitome of the DK lemon-juice bank robber's cognitive bias!

*Hence, no amount of fact _can_ work with you, and with people like you!*
o That! Is my epiphany!

_MOUNT REFERENCES FACTS follow (not for Diesel - for tribal knowledge):_

o How to mount the entire mobile device file system on Linux/Windows
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/6PQmYWSk34I/9kz19EkZCQAJ>

o How to read/write access iOS file systems on Ubuntu/Windows over USB cable
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/IFC52JXBQ1c>

o How to transfer iPad photos/videos to/from Linux/Windows over Wi-Fi LAN?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/YtpKpDhWm_s/1z7AO3jQCAAJ>

o What's the best way to copy someone's iDevice's photos to another user's MacBook locally?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/xEF1mtuvvJc/eIts5lSSCwAJ>

o Do these 3 WiFi tests of a network location to a drive letter mapping work for you on Android 7.0 Nougat & Windows 10 using only freeware?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/IswZ5yEcpYA/wWuqoICZBgAJ>

o Tutorial to run any Windows command directly on Android over either USB or Wi-Fi
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/JrWLPRYO-TU/2gn6KqccBwAJ>

o What method you use to backup & share your installed apps on Android?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/FsRRoQbdKeo/biXD3Zv0AwAJ>

o Why doesn't Ubuntu 18.04 ask to install next to Windows 10 Pro single HDD as a dual boot?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.os.linux/D7E7FQ1NLNk/B4xroB8rCAAJ>

o Proactive setup instructions for dual boot with Windows & Ubuntu via Grub using legacy keyboards
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.os.linux/WltumTFjzU8/98HTzaNuCAAJ>

o Freeware to access your Android hosts file from Windows without being root
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/LTQtwSGROw8/XePw-iPuAgAJ>
etc.

[arlen holder]

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 00:02:12 -0000 (UTC), Dan Purgert wrote:

> Are you willing to risk up to 2/3 of his mental capacity? Could prove
> disastrous, what with getting new threads concerning

Facts.

As I claimed prior, there can only be three possibilities:
a. Either people really _are_ that incredibly stupid, or,
b. They are simply pulling our leg for their own Usenet amusement, or
c. They really are left-side Dunning Kruger poster children...

Facts.

Here is another case, where nospam _claims_ functionality that simply
doesn't appear to exist, which is an indication of left-side DK, unless
o It's simply that nospam is incredibly stupid, or,
o It's simply that nospam is just making everything up for his own
amusement

If he's
a. Not incredibly stupid, or if he's
b. Not just pulling our leg, then...

What other explanation is there for his wholly unjustified claims?

The fact is that nospam repeatedly claims that something as trivially
simple as the existence of a free non-crippled smbv2 client exists for iOS
(non jailbroken) - and yet - after testing - nobody can find a _single_ one
that actually exists!
o Do you know of a free iOS SMBv2 (or SMBv3) client?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.ipad/1OY2fExXxaM>

The left-side Dunning-Kruger folks simply _guess_ about everything!
Their entire belief system is wholly imaginary!

It's sad, and utterly shocking that such people exist - but - that thread
proves that they do exist, amazingly so.
o They actually _believe_ what they claim, and yet,
o They can almost _never_ back up their claims.

And yet, amazingly, they _still_ believe their fanciful claims!

Only three possibilities exist that I know of to explain nospam's actions
1. Either he's really that incredibly stupid, or,
2. He's just making things up for his own personal childish amusement, or
3. He really _believes_ what he says (i.e., he's a lemon-juice bank-robber poster child)

[arlen holder]

UPDATE:

To be fair, it' a waste of time for any adult to attempt an intelligent
conversation with the likes of the score of classic LSOMS posters:

Why they consistently and incessantly prove that point, is amazing.
o Essentially, their mind is wired as a "left side of mount stupid" DK mind
o They own confidence - but not reason.
<https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1600/1*t2sx5h0UF-kljgC2sj2msw.jpeg>

The reason they have _never_ once added value to any thread, is simple:
o They are not just stupid... they _remain_ ignorant their entire lives.
o They revel as that of a child... which is why they chitchat well together
o They can't comprehend fact... yet, they _think_ they do! <== dangerous!
<https://understandinginnovation.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/dunning-kruger-0011.jpg>

In essence, they own the epitome of the lemon-juice bank robber's mind.
<https://scanfoam.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/adpativeDKblog3.jpg>

These are the well known
o Alan Baker <nu...@ness.biz>
o Alan Browne <bitb...@blackhole.com>
o B...@Onramp.net
o Char Jackson <no...@none.invalid>
o Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
o "Cybe R. Wizard" <cybe_r...@WizardsTower.invalid>
o Dan Purgert <d...@djph.net>
o Davoud <st...@sky.net>
o Diesel <m...@privacy.net> (aka Dustin Cook)
o Elden <use...@moondog.org>
o *Hemidactylus* <ecph...@allspamis.invalid>
o Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz>
o joe <no...@domain.invalid>
o John Doe <alway...@message.header>
o Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com>
o Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies>
o Nil <redn...@REMOVETHIScomcast.net>
o nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> [He's the remaining enigma]
o Rene Lamontagne <rla...@shaw.ca>
o "R.Wieser" <add...@not.available> (aka Rudy Wieser)
o Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> [He's not as dumb as most]
o Snit (the only poster in decades that I had to killfile!)
o Tim Streater <timst...@greenbee.net>
o Wade Garrett <wa...@cooler.net>
o Wolf K <wol...@sympatico.ca>
o Your Name <Your...@YourISP.com>
o et al.

The 3 words that they can _never_ answer as an adult would, are simply:
o *Name just one*

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 19:18:19 -0000 (UTC)
arlen holder <ar...@arlen.com> wrote:

> They revel as that of a child.

What?

Learn some English usage, arlene. Try making a real and complete
sentence. Most women can at least make themselves understood.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
A beautiful woman delights the eye; a wise woman, the understanding; a
pure one, the soul.
Minna Antrim

arlene, none of the above

[arlen holder]

UPDATE:

IMHO, there's no better left-side Dunning-Kruger Usenet example
on Usenet than _this_ thread, opened late last night by "badgolferman".
o facetime privacy bug
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/NFW7nz6FELw>

The posts by "Joerg Lorenz", of Germany, in that thread, are _perfect_
for explicitly showing _exactly_ the lemon-juice bank-robber cognitive
bias!

You have to actually _read_ the thread to believe people like that exist.
1. They're not just incredibly stupid,
2. They don't appear to be just pulling our leg.

Unfortunately...
3. They actually _believe_ they possess cognitive skills that they just don't.

You have to read that thread to actually believe such people exist.

[arlen holder]

Yet another classic example of left-side Dunning Kruger today.

This one from Alan Baker:
o First, he flatly refutes that Apple sat on the recent facetime bug.
o Even though the NY Times reported exactly that.

He flatly refutes what the NY Times says - sans a shred of proof.
o And he _repeats_ that, as he self-assessed the NYT as "untrustworthy".

Then, right after that, he flatly refuted that I snapped this picture for
him to illustrate why Apple marketing is sheer brilliance in turning a dead
woman into a stellar branding coup!

If someone says something bad about Apple - he flatly denies it.
If someone says something good about Apple - he flatly denies it.

These people deny _everything_ without a shred of fact to back it up.
o They "self assess" the facts ... and are _always_ dead wrong.

If that's not left-side Dunning-Kruger, I don't know what else is.

REFERENCES:
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/NFW7nz6FELw/KXuMLFD3BwAJ>
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/NFW7nz6FELw/4CjrtXL8BwAJ>

[Wolf K]

On 2019-01-31 00:43, arlen holder wrote:
[...]
> o First, he flatly refutes...
[...]

No, he "flatly denies". Refute = demonstrate a logical error in an
argument and thereby show that the inference is invalid. But not
necessarily false. Nor true. As the case may be.

Have a frabjous day,

--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com

A black cat crossing your path signifies that the animal is going
somewhere. (Groucho Marx)

[arlen holder]

OMG, this Dunning-Kruger proof _never_ stops
(at least on the iOS ngs it doesn't).

Here is a recent thread topic:
o What is the most brilliant marketing move Apple ever made?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wW-fu0jsvAU>

LOOK at this post by Alan Baker just moments ago!
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wW-fu0jsvAU/FX0gefM0CAAJ>

This is my post he's responding to (chock full of well-cited facts):
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wW-fu0jsvAU/q_MisdA0CAAJ>

Alan Baker doesn't even _click_ on the link, before questioning the facts!
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wW-fu0jsvAU/F_P8LUw1CAAJ>

Alan Baker _thinks_ he can comprehend fact from fiction,
o So he pointedly intimates they're not facts by asking where they came from
o When they came from EXACTLY where a normal person would look

HINT: I gave a link to the exact second where the transcribed quotes started!

Alan Baker _instantly_ questions where the facts came from .... WITHOUT
even clicking the link from where the facts came from.

*These people self assess their abilities far above what they really are.*

Jesus Christ.
o These left of mount stupid Dunning Kruger people really _do_ exist!
<https://timnovate.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/dunning-kruger.jpg>