Bill Huffman - You claimed Dr. Bear would be an expert witness.
Ed Bain
Bill, this is a post in which you claim Dr. Bear said that
Derek was:
"an obvious fraud and that he would be happy to testify in
court as my expert witness."
I have posted your entire message here.
Is this the truth, or is it a lie?
Is Dr. Bear glad to be your expert witness?
===================== begin ========================
Re: BC3K - Huffman's Stupidity Exposed
Author: Bill Huffman <huf...@my-dejanews.com>
Date: 1999/04/07
Forum: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
Posted on: 1999/04/07
Message-ID: <7efv00$8il$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion
References: <19990402013420...@ng156.aol.com> <7ear9d$1nr$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
<7ebsq2$is7$1...@oak.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <7ecjhu$gmc$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7ee7g8$psm$1...@oak.prod.itd.earthlink.net>
X-Article-Creation-Date: Wed Apr 07 15:52:36 1999 GMT
X-Http-Proxy: 1.1 x15.dejanews.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 207.104.102.16
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Windows 98)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In article <7ee7g8$psm$1...@oak.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
"Dan" <D...@nospamearthlink.net> wrote:
>
> Bill Huffman <huf...@my-dejanews.com> wrote in message
> news:7ecjhu$gmc$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com...
...
> Actually, you wrote on at least one other occasion the same lie
> that I claimed LIT stood for Lost In Time. You lied. Period.
Dense Dan, do you deny that your master sent you an email with
the ridiculous claim that LIT stood for Lost In Time? Confused
Dan, do you deny that your sycophant duty was to set up Derek's
"bombshell" that LIT stood for Lost In Time and that you carried
out your duty in the referenced post? Sap Dan, do you deny that
you have fallen for EVERY one of your master's many lies?
Hypocrite Dan, do you deny being the biggest super hypocrite
that ever existed?
>
> You include the evidence below. Dumbshit.
>
> So again, why do you keep lying? Because you can? Because you
> must? Eventually a few morons will figure out that you probably
> have a several more lies hidden as uncontested fact. Keep going.
> You cheapen any lame effort for respectibility at your site.
>
> Please try again to contact Dr. Bear directly. Have him examine
> your site. Please post his impresssions here. What? Can't handle
> the scrutiny of a real Distance Learning expert? Please feel free
> to insert your excuse for not contacting Dr. Bear here.
Why should I bother him? He already told me in email back in
the lawyer days that Mr. Smart was an obvious fraud and that
he would be happy to testify in court as my expert witness.
> Perhaps
> because the whole distance learning group shunned you the first
> time?
Dreaming Dan, you have once again lost contact with reality.
> Now. Shut the fuck up you lying sack 'o shitsky.
Can't provide one single example of LIT being used as Lost In
Time? hahahaha hohohoho hehehehe You really believed him. What
a sap.
Bill Huffman, PhD in Derekology,
ignoramus supremus and asshilarious
huf...@LITaccess1.net (Remove the LIT to email me.)
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
================== end ==============================
--
* rrevved at mindspring dot com
Ed Bain
in msg <LaBA3.5565$P72.1...@wbnws01.ne.mediaone.net>,
"Bill Lambrukos" <hel...@mediaone.net> said :
>>>Bill, this is a post in which you claim Dr. Bear said that
>Derek was:
>
>"an obvious fraud and that he would be happy to testify in
>court as my expert witness."
>
>I have posted your entire message here.
>
>Is this the truth, or is it a lie? <<
>
>Ed,
>
>Just out of curiosity, what is it you are trying to show ? I think Dr. Bear
>indicated he would testify as an expert witness, and I would assume he would
>not do this unless he felt there was good cause to support his testimony.
>You seem to be bothered that Bear has offered to testify and that he may
>have already come to the conclusion Smart is a fraud. Why would he offer to
>testify if he thought Smart did nothing wrong ?
>
>This is not meant to be a flame (or whatever), I am tryng to understand what
>your point is as it is unclear to me.
>
>Thanks
>
>Bill
>
>
>
Because there is a contradiction between what Bill claimed
earlier and what he says now:
=====================================================
1999/09/05
<7qu3rr$2v6$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
>We have been led to believe that you concluded some time ago that Derek
>was a fraud, told bill that, and agreed to serve as an expert witness in
>bill's defense. Is this true?
>
> Now Dan, I never claimed that Dr. Bear used those exact words
======================================================
Mark Asher
<hel...@mediaone.net> wrote:
>>>Bill, this is a post in which you claim Dr. Bear said that
>Derek was:
>
>"an obvious fraud and that he would be happy to testify in
>court as my expert witness."
>
>I have posted your entire message here.
>
>Is this the truth, or is it a lie? <<
>
>Ed,
>
>Just out of curiosity, what is it you are trying to show ? I think Dr. Bear
>indicated he would testify as an expert witness, and I would assume he would
>not do this unless he felt there was good cause to support his testimony.
>You seem to be bothered that Bear has offered to testify and that he may
>have already come to the conclusion Smart is a fraud. Why would he offer to
>testify if he thought Smart did nothing wrong ?
If he's like most expert witnesses, he is paid for his time. I'm sure
that if Bill wanted Bear to testify, he'd have to pay for airfare,
hotel, and a fee. It's also possible that Derek could hire Bear, and
then Bear would shape his testimony in ways that would benefit Derek's
case "There's no such thing as universal accreditation..." etc.
I served on a jury in a med-mal case, and the expert witnesses on both
sides made about $600 an hour. One witness billed for over 40 hours of
work for something like $23,000.
I'd be surprised if Dr. Bear charges that much, but he might easily
charge $75-$150 per hour. I could be wrong, though. Perhaps he is not
compensated when he testifies as an expert witness. It would be
interesting to hear Dr. Bear tell us what his typical fee is, if any.
Mark Asher
Patrick Muller
Ed Bain wrote:
> Bill, this is a post in which you claim Dr. Bear said that
> Derek was:
>
> "an obvious fraud and that he would be happy to testify in
> court as my expert witness."
>
> I have posted your entire message here.
>
> Is this the truth, or is it a lie?
>
> Is Dr. Bear glad to be your expert witness?
Perhaps if Dr. Bear would be so kind as to explain 'his' words.
John Bear
Asher) wrote:
> If he's like most expert witnesses, he is paid for his time. I'm sure
> that if Bill wanted Bear to testify, he'd have to pay for airfare,
> hotel, and a fee. It's also possible that Derek could hire Bear, and
> then Bear would shape his testimony in ways that would benefit Derek's
> case "There's no such thing as universal accreditation..." etc.
>
> I served on a jury in a med-mal case, and the expert witnesses on both
> sides made about $600 an hour. One witness billed for over 40 hours of
> work for something like $23,000.
>
> I'd be surprised if Dr. Bear charges that much, but he might easily
> charge $75-$150 per hour. I could be wrong, though. Perhaps he is not
> compensated when he testifies as an expert witness. It would be
> interesting to hear Dr. Bear tell us what his typical fee is, if any.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Bear replies:
For the 13 years that I was the only expert witness that the FBI's DipScam
(diploma mill) unit used (1979-1992), I was paid zero. Just out-of-pocket
expenses, plus pizza while preparing for trial. My, those FBI agents do
consume pizza.
For the Florida Board of Professional Licensing (they had a state prison
psychologist with a Ph.D. from the University of England at Oxford, which
cost him $600, no questions asked), I was paid $1,000 plus expenses for
about half a day (plus travel).
That's the range, with many variations in between. It is quite situational
with me: both the nature of the job, and the location. I did two days in
Paris once. I asked for first class travel (was living in Hawaii then),
but the fee hardly mattered. The time I went to El Paso, it cost my client
a bit more.
I would never take on a school or client I don't approve of. This is not
my career; it is something I do once every year or two, typically for some
fun, some profit, and/or some revenge/satisfaction (choose any two).
--
John Bear, Ph.D. (Michigan State University, 1966)
Co-Author, Bears' Guide (13th edition) described
at http://www.degree.net, and sold at www.amazon.com
or www.bn.com, bookstores, and www.tenspeed.com.
John Bear
John Bear replies:
Sorry, but I did not save a copy of whatever communication went on. Since
I had never heard of Dr. Smart before this matter arose, what I certainly
*should* have said, and I hope I did, was something along the line of "If
the facts are as you have presented them, then this person is an obvious
fraud, and I would be happy..." (etc.)
The world is so full of a number of things. A few years ago, I got very
long and well-written letter from a British professor, making the point,
with many references and footnotes, that Oxford University and Cambridge
University are operating illegally, because British law at the time
required a university to have either a Royal Charter, an Act of
Parliament, or a license from the Committee on National Academic Awards,
and they had none of the above, only (apparently) some obscure Papal Bull
from the twelfth century. If Dr. Smnart's degree is from Oxford or
Cambridge, I would not elect to testify against its legality. (However:
the "automatic" Master's degrees these two schools award to their
Bachelor's degree holders, for no further work other than staying out of
jail for four years, have always seemed very odd to me.)
Dan
John Bear <jo...@ursa.net> wrote in message
news:john-05099...@coat4.ppp.lmi.net...
>
> > > Bill, this is a post in which you claim Dr. Bear said that
> > > Derek was:
> > >
> > > "an obvious fraud and that he would be happy to testify in
> > > court as my expert witness."
> > >
> > > I have posted your entire message here.
> > >
> > > Is this the truth, or is it a lie?
> > >
> > > Is Dr. Bear glad to be your expert witness?
> >
> > Perhaps if Dr. Bear would be so kind as to explain 'his' words.
>
>
> John Bear replies:
> Sorry, but I did not save a copy of whatever communication went on. Since
> I had never heard of Dr. Smart before this matter arose, what I certainly
> *should* have said, and I hope I did, was something along the line of "If
> the facts are as you have presented them, then this person is an obvious
> fraud, and I would be happy..." (etc.)
Dr. Bear, bill says you said examined his website where he lays out the case
for Derek Smart's PhD fraud. Did you examine bill's website in 1998? Can
you confirm that you had an email conversation with bill during the first
half of 1998? The clear implication from bill is that you said Derek was an
obvious fraud and pledged to serve as an expert witness in bill's defense
because you examined bill's site in early 1998 and found it compelling. Is
this true?
jackyo
Derek Smart wrote in message <37d81269...@news.mindspring.com>...
>
>Now, as if this nonsense is not enough, he is accusing me of using my
>degree for conning and scamming unless I misread that, this is yet
>another clear case of libel, further, he consider him to be harrassing
>me because (a) I do *not* respond to him and haven't done so for
>almost a *year* (b) he has been in a killfile and he knows that I
>probably won't see half the crap he is typing.
>
>Thanks
Derek, I recall you telling us a while back about 'new' internet laws re:
harrasmment and stalking.
Well, I just watched 'The Practice', and sure enough, there was a case about
stuff on a web site and about difficulty in prosecution.
PLEASE post a link re: any of this stuff if you know it offhand - I would be
interested.
Thanks.
PS - the US Open was rained out today, so I spent the day getting drunk at
Tavern On the Green! They had a violin trio playing, and we <my fiance and
I - we finally set a wedding date> took a horse buggy ride through the rainy
park after. Had about four daquiris - they were GREAT !
Check this out - we were supposed to get married in November in Bermuda, but
she got the idea that, since we didn't have any Y2k plans yet, to kill 2
birds with one stone. Well, she took my credit card <just like your fiance!>
and booked us a suite at the St. Thomas Renaissance for New Years Week. We
are getting married on Sunset of New Years eve on the Beach, with a sailboat
ride afterwards.
Well, at first I was pretty psyched. Then, after drinking with her most of
the afternoon, she kinda tells me 'well, John <she ONLY calls me John when
she knows I am NOT going to like something she has to say!> , I hate to tell
you this, but the whole package cost $13K.
Man, I was *PISSED.* I had expected maybe 5 or 6k, which is what the Bermuda
thing would have cost.
So, I completely empathize what you went through with your fiance. They can
be so darn sneaky.
jackyo
Derek Smart wrote in message <37d913ab...@news.mindspring.com>...
<snip>
Just out of curiousty, exactly WHAT would it take from Bill huffman for you
to be willing to completely DROP the idea of a lawsuit?
Merek Fart
considered to be harrassing *me* if he knew he was in it, *since* he could then
assume that I wouldn't *read* anything that *he* posted. But these little
details of life are *far* too trivial for a mind as great as my own.
Whatever.
*plonk*
Merek Fart, M.D.
Recliner/Lead Enveloper
The Badgame Saga
www.freezebug.com
"It's not everyone smelling me and my bum that bothers me.
It's them interrupting me while I'm doing it!"
Derek Smart wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Sep 1999 21:17:53 GMT, em...@bottom.com (Ed Bain) wrote:
>
> Ed, can you please find out for me which thread Huffman said these
> words today? Someone sent it to me via email (for obvious reasons) but
> I can't seem to locate the thread. I'd like to get the entire post and
> the thread because I want to send this to my attorneys next week as
> well. When you read it, you'll see why.
>
> Now, as if this nonsense is not enough, he is accusing me of using my
> degree for conning and scamming unless I misread that, this is yet
> another clear case of libel, further, he consider him to be harrassing
> me because (a) I do *not* respond to him and haven't done so for
> almost a *year* (b) he has been in a killfile and he knows that I
> probably won't see half the crap he is typing.
>
> Thanks
>
> >Within the main line academic community, I think Daktari's statement is the
> >common opinion. Depending on what it is you want to accomplish, a degree
> >from an unaccredited school may be okay for some people. However, my guess
> >is that Derek probably got his diploma from a diploma or degree mill. That
> >would make it useless in almost all situations except for conning and
> >scamming. Mr. Smart has an opportunity to prove me wrong here without
> >revealing his alma mater and without revealing his super secret
> >discoveries. Let's see what he decides to do.
>
> Derek Smart, Ph.D.
> Designer/Lead Developer
> The Battlecruiser Series
> www.bc3000ad.com
>
> "It's not everyone telling me it can't be done that bothers me.
> It's them interrupting me while I'm doing it!"
Bill Lambrukos
Derek was:
"an obvious fraud and that he would be happy to testify in
court as my expert witness."
I have posted your entire message here.
Is this the truth, or is it a lie? <<
Ed,
Just out of curiosity, what is it you are trying to show ? I think Dr. Bear
indicated he would testify as an expert witness, and I would assume he would
not do this unless he felt there was good cause to support his testimony.
You seem to be bothered that Bear has offered to testify and that he may
have already come to the conclusion Smart is a fraud. Why would he offer to
testify if he thought Smart did nothing wrong ?
This is not meant to be a flame (or whatever), I am tryng to understand what
Bill Lambrukos
that if Bill wanted Bear to testify, he'd have to pay for airfare,
hotel, and a fee. It's also possible that Derek could hire Bear, and
then Bear would shape his testimony in ways that would benefit Derek's
case "There's no such thing as universal accreditation..." etc.
I served on a jury in a med-mal case, and the expert witnesses on both
sides made about $600 an hour. One witness billed for over 40 hours of
work for something like $23,000.
I'd be surprised if Dr. Bear charges that much, but he might easily
charge $75-$150 per hour. I could be wrong, though. Perhaps he is not
compensated when he testifies as an expert witness. It would be
interesting to hear Dr. Bear tell us what his typical fee is, if any.
Mark Asher<<
I was intimately involved in a court case (which included libel charges)
where our corporation paid over $1million dollars in legal and expert fees.
I was one of those on the witness list too, but survived not being called.
I can assure you that on both sides the attorneys were completely convinced
that it was an open and shut case for their side, that's why it's foolish to
argue here who may win in a Smart/Huffman case (one that will never be
filed, Derwoods' just makin noise and trying to scare Huffman). There are
simply too many unknowns, and a jury trial throw's it all into the air.
I assure you, experts, with the alleged credentials of Dr. Bear, do not sell
their expertise to the highest bidder, you discover that early in the
process. If that were the case, they would quickly be found out to
providing conflicting testimony at trials, and would soon be unable to sell
their services (never mind perjury). Dr. Bear would never work with the
FBI in the future in any capacity (or anyone else) if he were found to
simply be going with the highest bidder . I agree with you there are those
"experts" that will testify where it seems they are being bought, but you
will always find them taking that same position in multiple cases, or their
credibility quickly vanishes.
Ed explained that he wasn't questioning Dr. Bear's position, simply that he
felt Huffman had been inconsistent, and that explained to me the point he
was trying to make that I just wasn't getting (gettin' old I guess).
Thanks for your thoughs.
Bill
Bill Lambrukos
that if Bill wanted Bear to testify, he'd have to pay for airfare,
hotel, and a fee. It's also possible that Derek could hire Bear, and
then Bear would shape his testimony in ways that would benefit Derek's
case "There's no such thing as universal accreditation..." etc.
I served on a jury in a med-mal case, and the expert witnesses on both
sides made about $600 an hour. One witness billed for over 40 hours of
work for something like $23,000.
I'd be surprised if Dr. Bear charges that much, but he might easily
charge $75-$150 per hour. I could be wrong, though. Perhaps he is not
compensated when he testifies as an expert witness. It would be
interesting to hear Dr. Bear tell us what his typical fee is, if any.
Mark Asher<<
Mark, my apologies. In my prior post I thought you were implying Bear's
testimony could be bought. It was the "he is paid for his time" that threw
me. In rereading you post, it doesn't appear that was your intent.
SORRY !
Bill
Derek Smart
Ed Bain
in msg <37d81269...@news.mindspring.com>,
dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) said :
>On Sun, 05 Sep 1999 21:17:53 GMT, em...@bottom.com (Ed Bain) wrote:
>
>Ed, can you please find out for me which thread Huffman said these
>words today? Someone sent it to me via email (for obvious reasons) but
>I can't seem to locate the thread. I'd like to get the entire post and
>the thread because I want to send this to my attorneys next week as
>well. When you read it, you'll see why.
>
>Now, as if this nonsense is not enough, he is accusing me of using my
>degree for conning and scamming unless I misread that, this is yet
>another clear case of libel, further, he consider him to be harrassing
>me because (a) I do *not* respond to him and haven't done so for
>almost a *year* (b) he has been in a killfile and he knows that I
>probably won't see half the crap he is typing.
>
>Thanks
>
Here is the full post with all the message numbers you can use
in dejanews. Have fun!
============= begin quote =============
From: huf...@deja.com (Bill Huffman)
Newsgroups: alt.games.bc3000ad,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.space-sim
Subject: Re: BC3K- Dr Bear's Interesting Proposal
Date: Sun, 05 Sep 1999 22:28:14 GMT
Message-ID: <37d2ec8a...@news.access1.net>
References: <7qnb0u$hcb$1...@nnrp1.deja.com> <37d23a8e...@news.mindspring.com>
<37d3422c...@news.mindspring.com> <rsuqmb...@corp.supernews.com>
<37d1c9b0...@news.mindspring.com> <7qpl6d$9p1$1...@nntp3.atl.mindspring.net>
<37D101D3...@fenomedia.nl> <7qr0j2$uh5$1...@nntp6.atl.mindspring.net>
<7qrdk8$3vr$1...@ash.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <7qrdjd$2rp$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net>
<7qsfu9$9s$1...@birch.prod.itd.earthlink.net> <7qsie8$r7s$1...@nntp8.atl.mindspring.net>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.452
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandiego13-30.sandiego.access1.net
X-Trace: 5 Sep 1999 15:30:25 GMT, sandiego13-30.sandiego.access1.net
Lines: 60
Path: mindspring!news.mindspring.net!firehose.mindspring.net!
remarQ-easT!remarQ73!supernews.com!remarQ.com!news.good.net!
news.access1.net!sandiego13-30.sandiego.access1.net
On Sat, 4 Sep 1999 21:57:41 -0400, "DAKTARI!"
<noneyo...@mindpsring.com> wrote:
>
>Dan <d...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>[ 7qsfu9$9s$1...@birch.prod.itd.earthlink.net ]
>>
>> DAKTARI! <noneyo...@mindpsring.com> wrote in message
>> [ 7qrdjd$2rp$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net ]
>> >
>> > Dan <d...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> > [ 7qrdk8$3vr$1...@ash.prod.itd.earthlink.net ]
>> > >
>> > > DAKTARI! <noneyo...@mindpsring.com> wrote in message
>> > > [ 7qr0j2$uh5$1...@nntp6.atl.mindspring.net ]
>> > > >
>> > > > Patrick Muller <p.mu...@fenomedia.nl> wrote in message
>> > > > [ 37D101D3...@fenomedia.nl ]
>> > > >
>> > > > > Is a non-accredited Ph.D worthless?
>> > > >
>> > > > Yes, it is not worth the paper that it has been printed on.
>> > >
>> > > Daktari, serveral DL experts have already commented in this NG that
>> > > statements such as yours are full of shit. But please, don't stop. I
>> > enjoy
>> > > your idiocy.
>> >
>> >
>> > My comment is that a "non accredited" Ph.d is worthless.
>>
>> No shit? LOL
>>
>> Or was that small
>> > part lost on your towering intelect? Please go back and read the entire
>> > post.
>>
>> It appears my comment was lost on *you*. Here, bozo. The statement that
>a
>> "non-accredited PhD is worthless" has been contradicted by some of the DL
>> folks here. Your comment is crap, and you are an idiot. Need that one
>more
>> time?
>
>
>Ah Dan, You were doing so well ...
>Derek used you as his chimp, get over it!
>An non accredited degree is worthless, period, end of comment, no room for
>fudging this time. I would love to see his face if he were to try and use
>it for course credit. They most likely point to a stall in the lavatory and
>ask him to hang it next to the roll in the commode.
Within the main line academic community, I think Daktari's statement is the
common opinion. Depending on what it is you want to accomplish, a degree
from an unaccredited school may be okay for some people. However, my guess
is that Derek probably got his diploma from a diploma or degree mill. That
would make it useless in almost all situations except for conning and
scamming. Mr. Smart has an opportunity to prove me wrong here without
revealing his alma mater and without revealing his super secret
discoveries. Let's see what he decides to do.
=============== end quote =================
--
* rrevved at mindspring dot com
* unit.26 s.p.u.t.u.m.
* http://www.cabal.net
Derek Smart
>If he's like most expert witnesses, he is paid for his time. I'm sure
>that if Bill wanted Bear to testify, he'd have to pay for airfare,
>hotel, and a fee. It's also possible that Derek could hire Bear, and
>then Bear would shape his testimony in ways that would benefit Derek's
>case "There's no such thing as universal accreditation..." etc.
>
>I served on a jury in a med-mal case, and the expert witnesses on both
>sides made about $600 an hour. One witness billed for over 40 hours of
>work for something like $23,000.
>
>I'd be surprised if Dr. Bear charges that much, but he might easily
>charge $75-$150 per hour. I could be wrong, though. Perhaps he is not
>compensated when he testifies as an expert witness. It would be
>interesting to hear Dr. Bear tell us what his typical fee is, if any.
>
>Mark Asher
I have already accumulated several thousand dollars in billed hours
over this Huffman nonsense since my FLA attorney hired experts to
investigate the issue, my claims etc and this fee includes that paid
to an expert on Internet laws, crime and punishment. I think I already
mentioned this. In 11 days, my fiance will be meeting with another
attorney appointed psychologist to discuss her 'feelings' of distress
of this whole matter and we plan on making her a complainant. Huffman
has *no* idea what he's up against.
Though my attorney (who reads this stuff) who Huffman knows, does not
condone me posting any of this stuff here, I had to in order to make a
point. If I was to hire any expert witness regarding my degree, it
would certainly be Dr Bear or someone of his calibre.
However, and I'm going to state this, again, painfully, the Ph.D.
issue is a peripheral matter. My main thrust is Huffman's libel,
stalking and harrassment. I have always discarded his foolish claims,
regardless of how many changes he has made to his site these past
THREE YEARS, as baseless, pointless and irrelevant. My stance, still
stands.
In fact, today, I was going through the file (adding more stuff to it)
and I came across FIVE (5) emails which Huffman sent to game magazine
editors (you folks have seen me post them here before I think) telling
them not to address me as Dr. Smart in their interviews and previews,
that I was a fraud and that for more 'info' they should check out his
site etc. Naturally, I was contacted and I don't think that there is a
single person on the planet who doesn't know a kook when he sees one.
He has tried, for a very long time, to drag the mainstream gaming
media into this farce, unsuccessfully, and this Usenet is his only
forum. Somehow, Huffman thinks that the industry would turn against
and take up arms against 'one of their own' - me, a respected,
hardworking developer who cares about nothing else but 'the game, the
industry and my contributions to it', for no apparent reason. He gave
up on that eons ago.
In fact, he also started threads about this (those were quickly beat
down and he was chased away) on some game forums as well as
alt.education.distance. So, I ask you guys to tell me what *normal*
person can do this and claim that he is not stalking, harrassing and
commiting libel?
I will say this again, the desktop attorneys (DA) can twinkle this out
all day long, the end result will be determined by a court of law and
by a competent jury/judge. Its been THREE YEARS, I can wait a few more
weeks while my attorneys build their case and Huffman continues to
self-destruct. Rather than pack up and go home to oblivion, he
continues to dig deeper and wider holes for himself.
Huffman is nobody and it burns his heart to the extent that the issue
of low self-esteem became a moot point a long time ago. Accredited
degree or not, my contributions to the industry, my dedication to it
and the fans and the fans I have worldwide, are the things that make
*me* somebody in the industry. Huffman thinks his 'discovery' or
lackof, make him any less a nobody than he already is. Only time, will
tell. I for one, remain steadfast and will continue to fight fire with
fire. Its the only way to be sure.
Ed Bain
in msg <37d31898...@news.mindspring.com>,
em...@bottom.com (Ed Bain) said :
>On Mon, 06 Sep 1999 01:04:51 GMT,
>in msg <37d81269...@news.mindspring.com>,
>dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) said :
>
>>On Sun, 05 Sep 1999 21:17:53 GMT, em...@bottom.com (Ed Bain) wrote:
>>
>>Ed, can you please find out for me which thread Huffman said these
>>words today?
>
>Here is the full post with all the message numbers you can use
>in dejanews. Have fun!
>
Derek, in case you don't know, you can just click on the message
numbers in Agent, and it will re-pull the full post from the
Mindspring server, if it hasn't srolled off. Also, if you have the
post archived in a folder, it will bring it up immediately.
Cool.... ;)
Derek Smart
>On Mon, 06 Sep 1999 01:31:20 GMT,
>in msg <37d31898...@news.mindspring.com>,
>em...@bottom.com (Ed Bain) said :
>
>>On Mon, 06 Sep 1999 01:04:51 GMT,
>>in msg <37d81269...@news.mindspring.com>,
>>dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart) said :
>>
>>>On Sun, 05 Sep 1999 21:17:53 GMT, em...@bottom.com (Ed Bain) wrote:
>>>
>>>Ed, can you please find out for me which thread Huffman said these
>>>words today?
>>
>>Here is the full post with all the message numbers you can use
>>in dejanews. Have fun!
>>
>
>Derek, in case you don't know, you can just click on the message
>numbers in Agent, and it will re-pull the full post from the
>Mindspring server, if it hasn't srolled off. Also, if you have the
>post archived in a folder, it will bring it up immediately.
>
>Cool.... ;)
I know but I didn't *see* the post, I only got the snippet via email.
Going thru all posts with the red circle marking (killed) and then
checking for Huffman's post and pulling it, was what I didn't want to
do, but I did anyway and now I've got it. Thanks!
Quatoria, er, BrotherGrimm, er, Nevermind...
enforcement officer and his family are suing a couple over a web-site
they put up after the two groups had an unpleasant encounter. However,
in that case, the law enforcement officer and his family can show they
have suffered real world damage from the internet attack: one of their
daughters was assaulted and molested by people in her school who had
read the site. They're suing for a million dollars. If they win, it
could set an important precedent for the DS case (if said case ever
happens)
On Mon, 06 Sep 1999 01:28:59 GMT, dsm...@pobox.com (Derek Smart)
wrote:
>Derek Smart, Ph.D.
>Designer/Lead Developer
>The Battlecruiser Series
>www.bc3000ad.com
>
>"It's not everyone telling me it can't be done that bothers me.
>It's them interrupting me while I'm doing it!"
Quatoria
--
"It's time for you to go home to your wives and children..it's time for me to be dead for a while, and then live again...
Hello, Farewell."
-Billy Pilgrim, Slaughterhouse Five
"Oh Benson, dear Benson, you are so mercifully free of the ravages of intelligence."
-Evil, Time Bandits
foamy
dsm...@pobox.com wrote:
Somehow, Huffman thinks that the industry would turn against
>and take up arms against 'one of their own' - me, a respected,
>hardworking developer who cares about nothing else but 'the game, the
>industry and my contributions to it',
If anyone can read this self-serving delusional bs without throwing-up,
you've got a cast iron stomach.
>>Accredited
>degree or not, my contributions to the industry, my dedication to it
>and the fans and the fans I have worldwide, are the things that make
>*me* somebody in the industry.
Yes, they certainly do. They make you the biggest laughing stock
ever. You're a real " somebody ". A somebody who lied, deceived,
insulted, berated, threatened, and generally speaking is the most
obnoxious, unjustifiably egocentric human being it has ever been
my displeasure to encounter on usenet. Yep, you're a real somebody.
Huffman thinks his 'discovery' or
>lackof, make him any less a nobody than he already is. Only time, will
>tell. I for one, remain steadfast and will continue to fight fire with
>fire. Its the only way to be sure.
Uh, sure of what ? Did you get interrupted by the many visiting pilgrims
to " somebodyland ", and forgot to finish the sentence ?
Your crying the blues is getting a tad tiresome. Quit your blubbering,
you're quickly moving from revolting to pathetic.
Jim
Allan Parent
Derek Smart wrote:
>
> >>Accredited
> >degree or not, my contributions to the industry, my dedication to it
> >and the fans and the fans I have worldwide, are the things that make
> >*me* somebody in the industry.
>
If I were you derek, I would stay away from sharp objects. Since one
puncture would surly send you whizzing around the room as your ego
deflates. You are somebody in the industry all right. Somebody at which
people and even CGW (latest issue) poke fun.
Allan
Bill Huffman
>On Mon, 6 Sep 1999 05:22:47 -0400, "Bill Lambrukos"
><hel...@mediaone.net> wrote:
>
>>>>Bill, this is a post in which you claim Dr. Bear said that
>>Derek was:
>>
>>"an obvious fraud and that he would be happy to testify in
>>court as my expert witness."
>>
>>I have posted your entire message here.
>>
>>Is this the truth, or is it a lie? <<
>>
>>Ed,
>>
>>Just out of curiosity, what is it you are trying to show ? I think Dr. Bear
>>indicated he would testify as an expert witness, and I would assume he would
>>not do this unless he felt there was good cause to support his testimony.
>>You seem to be bothered that Bear has offered to testify and that he may
>>have already come to the conclusion Smart is a fraud. Why would he offer to
>>testify if he thought Smart did nothing wrong ?
>
>If he's like most expert witnesses, he is paid for his time. I'm sure
>that if Bill wanted Bear to testify, he'd have to pay for airfare,
>hotel, and a fee. It's also possible that Derek could hire Bear, and
>then Bear would shape his testimony in ways that would benefit Derek's
>case "There's no such thing as universal accreditation..." etc.
>
>I served on a jury in a med-mal case, and the expert witnesses on both
>sides made about $600 an hour. One witness billed for over 40 hours of
>work for something like $23,000.
>
>I'd be surprised if Dr. Bear charges that much, but he might easily
>charge $75-$150 per hour. I could be wrong, though. Perhaps he is not
>compensated when he testifies as an expert witness. It would be
>interesting to hear Dr. Bear tell us what his typical fee is, if any.
>
>Mark Asher
I think Dr. Bear is regarded as the leading authority in the country if not
the world on these issues. He could get as much as he wanted. Of course he
would have been paid for his services and been reimbursed for expenses. He
also has a reputation for being very generous and magnanimous. He has spent
tremendous effort and personal expense fighting the scum that get filthy
rich by preying on the (ethically) weak and uninformed that pay large fees
for worthless pieces of paper. When the law starts getting on their trail
they just close up shop and reopen someplace else.
When Dr. Bear warns people about them they sue him. Not because they can
win anything because they can't and never have but, because they are rich
spoiled brats that just want to force Dr. John Bear to waste his time and
money defending himself. Derek Smart has almost explicitly said that that
is the kind of person he is. Derek Smart has said that he is going to sue
me and he doesn't even care whether or not he wins. He just wants revenge.
He says in the same post that I'm going to be sued no matter what and he
says the only way I'm not going to be sued is if I quit and go away. I
think Dr. Bear is very smart to try and stay above this fray.
I apologize for mentioning that he had agreed to testify as an expert
witness. I think that Dan is showing his immoral character by continuing to
harass Dr. Bear even after he answered his question. He just didn't give
Dan the answer he wanted to hear.
Bill Lambrukos
Bermuda
thing would have cost.
So, I completely empathize what you went through with your fiance. They can
be so darn sneaky.<<
I've been married 10 years now, and man......you ain't seen nothing yet !!!
: ^ )
Bill
Bill Lambrukos
Allan<<
No, no. Let him keep talking. When he states things like this it proves
Bill's point that he is a public person, and certainly considers himself to
be a public person. This libel suit (which Derwood will never file) becomes
more impossible to win when he says foolish things like this.
Hey Derwood, I'll ask again, when are you going to file the suit and stop
talking about it only?
Bill
Bill Huffman
...
>However, and I'm going to state this, again, painfully, the Ph.D.
>issue is a peripheral matter. My main thrust is Huffman's libel,
>stalking and harrassment.
Notice how quickly the liar switches his web of lies? Here's a directory
of a few dozen threats from Mr. Smart where he's threatening to sue for
calling him a PhD fraud. Now Mr. Smart is trying to say that PhD fraud was
just a "peripheral matter".
http://www.access1.net/huffman/archives/1NotSoSmartPosts/1MakingThreats
It would be hilarious to see Derek go into court and try and convince
everyone that the defamation of me calling Mr. Smart a blow hard somehow
overshadowed the damage caused by Mr. Smart's own PhD fraud. This DA
(Desktop Attorney) thinks he would be laughed out of court by everyone
including the bailiff.
Allan Parent
happened by now if it were ever to occur.
Allan
Bill Lambrukos
It would be hilarious to see Derek go into court and try and convince
everyone that the defamation of me calling Mr. Smart a blow hard somehow
overshadowed the damage caused by Mr. Smart's own PhD fraud. This DA
(Desktop Attorney) thinks he would be laughed out of court by everyone
including the bailiff.<<
WOW ! For the first time, and I've been semi-following this from day one,
I checked out your web page, I was concentrating on Derwood's own posts, not
your comments. Anyone who reads his posts and still can't see him for what
he is simply have got to be wearing blinders.....or worse.
As for the alleged court case, heck, back in May 1998 he was giving you your
LAST chance, and here we are now closeing in on 2000 and the guys still does
nothing more legally then threaten. What a joke !
However, I should stop feeling like I was suckered out of $50.00 when I
bought Battleshit 3000, Derwood's rantings (those of a "man" slowly going
insane), have provided far more entertainment then $50.00 could ever buy !!
Bill
Allan Parent
I have noticed that when your "score" on derek he always reverts to his
revisionist defense or just totally ignores the reply. Watch and wait,
we should be getting a nice big DS rant including the "oh poor me" and
"I will succeed" lines. Now that the PhD thing is essentially over due
to his KWU debacle, the focus of the flamewar will shift to the
"stalking and harassment" issue. I really do not think this will ever
come to trial. If it hasn't by now, it never will.
Allan
Allan Parent
little game ever has or will. What a legacy.
Allan
jackyo
Bill Lambrukos wrote in message ...
Yeah, Krud warned me too.
Dan Snelson
wouldn't that sort of limit which school to even could be from? Example
California Coast University California approved but unaccredited an NO
computer science degrees. And how many accredited Schools distance or not
have Computer Science specific PhD.'s?
Just a thought.
Dan S
PS Derek, the only way you can prove your injury it is to name the school,
you go to court a tell the Judge you have a Ph.D but won't tell where it is
from and he won't do alot of laughing, but either *case dismissed* or hold
you in *contempt of court * seems a lot more likely.
PPS To Dereks attack dogs A) Are you his employees? and B) When a public
figure such as Derek claims a specific fact about his life the Public does
have a right to the TRUTH, you may not like that but that is the way it is.
If he only was using it to impress you no problem, but when it moves into an
area of trust (my game is good, trust me I have a Ph.D) that is different.
If I get a Ph.D from a non accredited University no biggies until I start
using it at my work then MY customers have that same right to Know!
Bill Lambrukos wrote in message ...
Dan
Bill Huffman <huf...@deja.com> wrote in message
news:37d456c9....@news.access1.net...
bill do you still claim that Dr. Bear reviewed your site during the lawyer
days and that he said that Derek Smart was an obvious fraud at that time?
Do you still claim that Dr. Bear agreed during the lawyer days to be an
expert witness in your defense?
Do you deny having encouraged me, even "dared me" several times to contact
Dr. Bear to confirm this information? you asked me to get Dr. Bear's
permission to post his amail discussions with you. Was that immoral of you,
to have drawn Dr. Bear into this then, and drawn him into the fray again?
Were you encouraging harrassment of Dr. Bear then, but that was "OK
harrassment?" Should Dr. Bear be off limits to all but yourself? Is that
your morality, bill? Did Dr. Bear answer my specific questions posed on
this newsgroup? The only answers I've seen so far do not acknowledge your
version of the events. They seem carefully worded to avoid acknowleding
anything other than an incidental connection with you. They certainly do
not acknowledge your version of the events. Are those the answers you
expected?
Patrick Muller
Bill Lambrukos wrote:
> If I were you derek, I would stay away from sharp objects. Since one
> puncture would surly send you whizzing around the room as your ego
> deflates.
This is actually quite funny...
oh.. ehm..
Patrick Muller
jackyo wrote:
His head on a platter?
Steve Levicoff
> <Message imbedded in his subject line.>
Who the fuck cares?
S.
Bill Huffman
"Dan" <d...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> bill do you still claim that Dr. Bear reviewed your site during the
lawyer
> days and that he said that Derek Smart was an obvious fraud at that
time?
Yes, as I said "obvious fraud" was my wording not Dr. Bear's wording.
> Do you still claim that Dr. Bear agreed during the lawyer days to be
an
> expert witness in your defense?
Yes he did?
> Do you deny having encouraged me, even "dared me" several times to
contact
> Dr. Bear to confirm this information?
Dan, this was your little game. You called me a liar. This was even one
of the 10 lies you alleged that I told. see
http://www.access1.net/huffman/archives/1ToadyWatch/DanAllegesLies.txt
I hassled you because you claimed that you were going to write him and
since you a an unethical man, if Dr. Bear had replied with an answer
you didn't like then you would not apologize for calling me a liar. You
would almost assuredly keep more mouth shut and not admit that you were
once again proven wrong. So I had fun hassling you.
>you asked me to get Dr. Bear's
> permission to post his amail discussions with you. Was that immoral
of you,
> to have drawn Dr. Bear into this then, and drawn him into the fray
again?\
Dan, you were the one that couldn't believe that Dr. Bear could
possibly agree to be an expert witness. You were the one who even after
calling UMI could not believe that dissertation was somehow a common
occurence. This was your deal, Cremated Man. I just had fun at your
expense because you had just once again shown what a toady you are.
> Were you encouraging harrassment of Dr. Bear then, but that was "OK
> harrassment?" Should Dr. Bear be off limits to all but yourself? Is
that
> your morality, bill? Did Dr. Bear answer my specific questions posed
on
> this newsgroup? The only answers I've seen so far do not acknowledge
your
> version of the events. They seem carefully worded to avoid
acknowleding
> anything other than an incidental connection with you. They
certainly do
> not acknowledge your version of the events. Are those the answers you
> expected?
Dan I expect you to be what you are. That is an immoral unethical
person that will apologize for seeming to threaten to contact my
employer. Then make 40 posts condemning the contact of employers
because of a flame war. Then contacts my employer. You are a person of
no character and your morally bankrupt state has been exposed for all
to see.
--
Bill Huffman
huf...@FRAUDaccess1.net (Remove the FRAUD to
email me.)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Bob Myers
Will Bill "Phosphorous Dragon slayer" Huffman, of course.
That's why you see all the PhD talk. It all relates back to
a online multiplayer space-sim/fantasy game where slaying
a Phosphorous Dragon (PhD for short) is the coup de
main.
Bill's the leader of the team trying to slay the PhD;
Derek Smart is the principal defender. Current status
of the game: Huffman's team has flushed the PhD from
it's lair, and shown it to be a rather pale imitation of
what you'd expect a PhD to be. (Huffman did this by
calling forth the Bear of A.E.D.) Smart has changed
strategies from hiding the PhD's real nature to attempting
to get the PhD under the protection of the Court of FLA.
To do this, he's staging a 'tourney, and, if this process
is followed through, the Court of FLA will decide which
'tourney (the Court will require Huffman have a 'tourney
also) is better, paying close attention to the 'tourney's
jousting and foundation. At that point, they'd decide if Huffman
is allowed to continue stalking the Phosphorous Dragon,
or if it will be safe. As a fallback position, Smart has also
taken to talk of breeding another PhD, one which would
be immune to the attacks Huffman has led against it so far.
It's a good game, you should follow it. There are no
membership dues, and people join in and disappear from
time to time, just like any other online game. The main
players are pretty stable, though. The only system requirements
are a internet connection, of course, and a sizeable amount
of disk storage for storing past moves. It also doesn't hurt
if you have multiple internet accounts, for playing different
personas in the game.
Since the PhD is pretty battered right now, with only
Smart hanging onto its status as a real fire-breather,
I'm not sure where the designers will lead the game
next. Should be interesting, though.
(I'm personally not sure why they call it a space-sim/fantasy
game, but apparently it's because some of the players are
spaced-out, and others are living in a fantasy world...)
Dan Snelson
DBS
Steve Levicoff wrote in message <7r1bui$h...@dfw-ixnews10.ix.netcom.com>...
Dan Snelson
Dan
Bob this is truly worht the price of admission!
Bob Myers wrote in message ...
foamy
"Bob Myers" <bmy...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>(I'm personally not sure why they call it a space-sim/fantasy
>game, but apparently it's because some of the players are
>spaced-out, and others are living in a fantasy world...)
LOL...very good synopsis. <G>
I seem to sign up and drop out of this game more often
than UO. :-)
Jim
Dan
Bill Huffman <huf...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:7r1h06$cig$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <7r0u6g$i83$1...@oak.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> "Dan" <d...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > bill do you still claim that Dr. Bear reviewed your site during the
> lawyer
> > days and that he said that Derek Smart was an obvious fraud at that
> time?
>
> Yes, as I said "obvious fraud" was my wording not Dr. Bear's wording.
You did not say that bill. Your posts in 1998 and early 99 state that Dr
Bear told you Derek was an obvious fraud. This would appear to be another
lie. That would be typical, bill, your using a new lie to cover another.
> > Do you still claim that Dr. Bear agreed during the lawyer days to be
> an
> > expert witness in your defense?
>
> Yes he did?
Yes he did? Or yes, he did (?)
> > Do you deny having encouraged me, even "dared me" several times to
> contact
> > Dr. Bear to confirm this information?
>
> Dan, this was your little game. You called me a liar. This was even one
> of the 10 lies you alleged that I told. see
> http://www.access1.net/huffman/archives/1ToadyWatch/DanAllegesLies.txt
> I hassled you because you claimed that you were going to write him and
> since you a an unethical man, if Dr. Bear had replied with an answer
> you didn't like then you would not apologize for calling me a liar. You
> would almost assuredly keep more mouth shut and not admit that you were
> once again proven wrong. So I had fun hassling you.
bill there is no surprise here that you misrepresent the facts. I did not
claim you lied about Dr Bear as an expert witness. I said I would reserve
judgement, though I had little doubt that it was a lie. You even
acknowledged that I wasn't (yet) calling you a liar on that count, yet you
now claim I called you a liar on that count. Your laughable "dancing baby"
responses in the link above shows you to be a very confused puppy.
You answered the prior questions directly and neatly skirted around this
one. This could serve as further indication that you have been caught in a
lie, bill. I'll ask again, do you deny having encouraged me to contact Dr
Bear? Check here:
____yes ____no
> >you asked me to get Dr. Bear's
> > permission to post his amail discussions with you. Was that immoral
> of you,
> > to have drawn Dr. Bear into this then, and drawn him into the fray
> again?\
>
> Dan, you were the one that couldn't believe that Dr. Bear could
> possibly agree to be an expert witness.
I doubted it, yes indeed. I have even more reason to doubt it now, given Dr
Bear's non-stance on the issue and your conflicting posts and frenetic
dancing.
You were the one who even after
> calling UMI could not believe that dissertation was somehow a common
> occurence.
Hello? "That dissertation was somehow a common occurance?" I'm sure you
meant that as some diversionary tactic, I know you're flustered, but try to
make some sense with your dance.
This was your deal, Cremated Man. I just had fun at your
> expense because you had just once again shown what a toady you are.
So, you are saying that it is immoral for me to ask Dr Bear for a direct
answer to a pertinent question, but - it is perfectly AOK for you to have
had early 1998 email conversations with Dr Bear (the validity of said claim
quite suspicious), to have had newsgroup conversations with Dr Bear
inquiring about LIT and LIAR, to have invited Dr Bear to take a look at your
"little flamewar" and website, to have brought Dr Bear's name into the
flamewar literally dozens of times, to have proudly proclaimed Dr Bear's
opinion of Derek Smart in this flamewar (more shenanigans, I suspect), to
have cross-posted this flamewar into AED in order to solicite the responses
of AED illuminati including Dr Bear, <breath> but it is immoral for me to
ask for a direct response to direct question (that you can't answer
directly) from Dr Bear. Hey bill,
HYPOCRITE.
HYPOCRITE.
HYPOCRITE.
HYPOCRITE.
HYPOCRITE.
HYPOCRITE.
HYPOCRITE.
HYPOCRITE.
You get the picture.
> > Were you encouraging harrassment of Dr. Bear then, but that was "OK
> > harrassment?" Should Dr. Bear be off limits to all but yourself? Is
> that
> > your morality, bill? Did Dr. Bear answer my specific questions posed
> on
> > this newsgroup? The only answers I've seen so far do not acknowledge
> your
> > version of the events. They seem carefully worded to avoid
> acknowleding
> > anything other than an incidental connection with you. They
> certainly do
> > not acknowledge your version of the events. Are those the answers you
> > expected?
>
> Dan I expect you to be what you are.
More avoidance. You do know that makes for good reading in the "Why bill
huffman is a liar and a hypocrite section of the new website I'm
considering. LOL
That is an immoral unethical
> person that will apologize for seeming to threaten to contact my
> employer. Then make 40 posts condemning the contact of employers
> because of a flame war. Then contacts my employer. You are a person of
> no character and your morally bankrupt state has been exposed for all
> to see.
bill, you didn't answer the questions. Here. I'll put it to you very
briefly - were you lying when you wrote: "Why should I bother him? He
already told me in email back in
the lawyer days that Mr. Smart was an obvious fraud and that he would be
happy to testify in court as my expert witness." Were you a liar when you
wrote: "I already explained that he examined my site back in the lawyer
days."
And the answers are . . .
marcco
You mean you've never seen the renowned "Bill Huffman Show"? It's all
the graze in Brazilian and Etiopian TV!
I just love it when B.H. always ends his show with the same joke about
eskimos and two Japanese tourists, and goes "ga ga!" at the end! It is
so funny!
Bill Lambrukos
duly impressed ! I've read some of the funniest things (even beyond the
hilarity of Battleshit 3000 will be patched and working in two weeks) on
these NG's related to the Derwood not-so-Smart conflict. This one is right
up there in bringing more humor to this discussion.
Bill
(I'm personally not sure why they call it a space-sim/fantasy
Gary Hladik
[snip]
>I have already accumulated several thousand dollars in billed hours
>over this Huffman nonsense since my FLA attorney hired experts to
>investigate the issue, my claims etc and this fee includes that paid
>to an expert on Internet laws, crime and punishment.
Am I missing something here? Why pay attorneys when Mr. Smart can contact
Mr. Huffman's ISP and get him thrown off for (alleged) harrassment? If
the ISP ignores a legitimate complaint, it could end up a co-defendant in
a subsequent lawsuit. Presumably its pockets are deeper than Mr.
Huffman's (who, as last I read in this NG, lives in a dumpster). :-)
Gary
foamy
ga...@netcom.com (Gary Hladik) wrote:
>Am I missing something here?
>Gary
Only everything. Before commenting you would have been
wise to read up a bit.
Smart tried and failed to get Bill's site shut down. He can't do
it because there is NO harassment, no libel, nada. His ISP
would have shut him down in a heartbeat if they could have
found the slightest of grounds, if only to avoid the headache. <G>
Jim
Reb Ruster
<sup...@blackboxstudios.com> was picking his nose, and came up with
>
>
"Wild" Bill Huffman is a person hired by the Many to keep Derek Smart
from becoming too pompous.
Larry McQueary
This is very true. As I stated in another post a few days ago, not only is it
not possible to get a DL Ph.D. based in whole or in part on credit from 'work
experience', there are no zero-residency DL Ph.D. programs in Computer Science
that I'm aware of.
Larry
Dan Snelson <snel...@gte.net> wrote in message
news:pPSA3.418$Fn1....@dfiatx1-snr1.gtei.net...
Larry McQueary
Larry
Allan Parent <all...@flash.net> wrote in message
news:37D3E189...@flash.net...
Larry McQueary
but I can't be bothered to read up on it (sorry!). I, for one, am stumped at
the relevance of your line of questioning. If you prove Bill lied, then what?
D. Smart's "Ph.D." suddenly becomes valid? B. Huffman suddenly is proven to be
a harrasser and stalker, as you and others allege?
On the scoreboard of 'Creativity with the Truth', I think top-seed Mr. Smart is
unlikely to be unseated any time soon. :-)
Larry
Dan <d...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:7r0u6g$i83$1...@oak.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> Bill Huffman <huf...@deja.com> wrote in message
> news:37d456c9....@news.access1.net...
> > On Sun, 05 Sep 1999 22:36:06 GMT, ma...@cdmnet.com (Mark Asher) wrote:
> >
> > >On Mon, 6 Sep 1999 05:22:47 -0400, "Bill Lambrukos"
> > ><hel...@mediaone.net> wrote:
> > >
> > >>>>Bill, this is a post in which you claim Dr. Bear said that
> > >>Derek was:
> > >>
> > >>"an obvious fraud and that he would be happy to testify in
> > >>court as my expert witness."
> > >>
> bill do you still claim that Dr. Bear reviewed your site during the lawyer
> days and that he said that Derek Smart was an obvious fraud at that time?
> Do you still claim that Dr. Bear agreed during the lawyer days to be an
> expert witness in your defense?
>
> Do you deny having encouraged me, even "dared me" several times to contact
> Dr. Bear to confirm this information? you asked me to get Dr. Bear's
> permission to post his amail discussions with you. Was that immoral of you,
> to have drawn Dr. Bear into this then, and drawn him into the fray again?
Gary Hladik
So now Mr. Huffman's ISP will be a co-defendant if/when the harassment
suit is filed? After all, if they took no action, wouldn't they be
liable, too?
Gary
Russ Blahetka
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Russ Blahetka
http://www.blahetka.com/school.shtml
Learn the rules then break some.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Thomas Nixon
marcco wrote:
> You mean you've never seen the renowned "Bill Huffman Show"? It's all
> the graze in Brazilian and Etiopian TV!
>
> I just love it when B.H. always ends his show with the same joke about
> eskimos and two Japanese tourists, and goes "ga ga!" at the end! It is
> so funny!
Having recently seen Ethiopian television, I can assure you that the "Bill
Huffman Show" could only help. (However, the rest of the country is
wonderful!)
Tom
foamy
ga...@netcom.com (Gary Hladik) wrote:
>So now Mr. Huffman's ISP will be a co-defendant if/when the harassment
>suit is filed?
That's possible in the sense that anyone " can " be sued. But
the validity of the suit is another matter.
After all, if they took no action, wouldn't they be
>liable, too?
Yes, if in fact Smart's suit [ which he will never bring ] was successful
and he could demonstrate they were aware and somehow negligent.
The point really is, Bill's ISP did nothing because there was no reason
to do anything. This latest dream of " harassment " is laughable in the
sense Smart couldn't be " harassed " unless he visited the site. A judge
would summarize the case as follows:
Smart: " Judge, it hurts me deeply when I go there. "
Judge: " Well, don't go there. "
Jim
Dan
Larry McQueary <Termin...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:wHbB3.16809$vu2....@news.rdc1.tx.home.com...
> Clearly, this specific esoteric dispute predates my awareness of this
flamewar,
Ouch, that hurt my brane! I vote we kick all the acedemics out! LOL
> but I can't be bothered to read up on it (sorry!). I, for one, am stumped
at
> the relevance of your line of questioning. If you prove Bill lied, then
what?
Dogs and babies will be able to rest comfortably.
> D. Smart's "Ph.D." suddenly becomes valid? B. Huffman suddenly is proven
to be
> a harrasser and stalker, as you and others allege?
Neither is a concern.
>
> On the scoreboard of 'Creativity with the Truth', I think top-seed Mr.
Smart is
> unlikely to be unseated any time soon. :-)
LOL. I suspect he will have company, given the santimonious claims we've
been exposed to thru the 'years.'
Bill Lambrukos
liable, too?<<
Only in theory Gary. The fact is, you will never see a law uit filed. If
Derwood was going to do so, he would have done so LONG ago, like back in May
lf 1998 when he told Huffman "this is your last chance".
Bill
Rasta Kyle
Too many free internet accounts for that to be a valid stategy.
Rasta Kyle
And I would agree with that statement....beats me why he issued all
those idle threats and never followed through with a single one.
Bill Huffman
I'm thinking of moving out because ever since Mr. Smart's bankruptcy
he's only letting me wash his cars once every three weeks. Also, a darn
chinese restaurant just opened up and the dumpster is not nearly so
pleasant of a place to stay, especially a few days before the trash
gets dumped.
> Gary
Jimmy Chan
wrote:
You don't suppose that DS knew that he knew he had no case as he was a
fraud and Bill H. was correct and truthful?
Gary Hladik
>>ga...@netcom.com (Gary Hladik) wrote:
[snip Mr. Smart's legal fees]
>>Am I missing something here? Why pay attorneys when Mr. Smart can contact
>>Mr. Huffman's ISP and get him thrown off for (alleged) harrassment? If
>>the ISP ignores a legitimate complaint, it could end up a co-defendant in
>>a subsequent lawsuit. Presumably its pockets are deeper than Mr.
>>Huffman's (who, as last I read in this NG, lives in a dumpster). :-)
>>
>>Gary
>Too many free internet accounts for that to be a valid stategy.
True, Mr. Huffman has a variety of potential ISPs to choose from. However,
1) If it works with one ISP, it'll work with others. Given Mr. Smart's
AI experience, he might even automate the complaint process if Mr.
Huffman switches ISPs often enough. :-)
2) Mr. Smart has cited the difficulty of building an effective legal case
as one reason for the lengthy delays in his threatened lawsuit(s). I
presume an ISP's requirements are less stringent. And if he can't
meet an ISP's standards, how can Mr. Smart satisfy a court of law?
3) Wouldn't it look better in court (in the unlikely event this ever gets
that far) if Mr. Smart had already exhausted his other options? How
can he credibly claim substantial damages if he can't be bothered
to take the relatively simple step of complaining to Mr. Huffman's ISP?
Disclaimer: I have no formal legal training, nor am I claiming any legal
expertise, even though I've seen every episode of "Ally McBeal." :-)
Gary
jackyo
Gary Hladik wrote in message <7r6nr8$4...@dfw-ixnews15.ix.netcom.com>...
>True, Mr. Huffman has a variety of potential ISPs to choose from. However,
>
>1) If it works with one ISP, it'll work with others. Given Mr. Smart's
> AI experience, he might even automate the complaint process if Mr.
> Huffman switches ISPs often enough. :-)
LOL! <# 5553>
>
>2) Mr. Smart has cited the difficulty of building an effective legal case
> as one reason for the lengthy delays in his threatened lawsuit(s). I
> presume an ISP's requirements are less stringent. And if he can't
> meet an ISP's standards, how can Mr. Smart satisfy a court of law?
Answer - he probably cannot.
>
>3) Wouldn't it look better in court (in the unlikely event this ever gets
> that far) if Mr. Smart had already exhausted his other options? How
> can he credibly claim substantial damages if he can't be bothered
> to take the relatively simple step of complaining to Mr. Huffman's ISP?
>
Well, he can always say that he wasn't aware of this recourse.
Of course, I don't think he has a case ; but that won't necessarily stop him
from suing.
If you recall, a year ago, he said he was going through with the suit
AGAINST the advice of his lawyer; i.e - he had no case <what lawyer would
*EVER* turn down a case where significant damages could be obtained?>
Some of the 'supporters' claim that, since the 'facts' have changed since
then, that he *DOES* have a case now;
I cannot see this - the only new fact we have is that his PHD was indeed
unaccreddited, thus removing the 'libel' factor in the suit; of course,
Derek now says this is simply a 'tangential' issue and the suit is about
harrassing. He MAY have a case here, since I admittedly know nothing about
NEWSGROUP stalking.
But damages? I don't think so - if Derek was serious about this, he should
be investigating gettting a 'cease and desist' order against Bill Huffman to
stop 'posting' about Derek Smart. After all, Derek claims that if Louis JM
so much as flames him again here, he will be in 'serious' trouble. So, if
this is true and not mere bluster <in other words, if the cops actually
COULD arrest louis for 'flaming Derek Smart' <as opposed to threatening
him>, which I strongly doubt>, I don't understand why he doesn't simply call
up the police in Bill's hometown and get him arrested, or at least warned
off.
Louis was out of line with the shotgun threats, and Derek told the cops he
feared for his safety. Fair enough. But what has Bill done to 'threaten'
Derek? The only threats came from Derek himself, when he said "I want to
DESTROY HUFFMAN. PERIOD."
My feelings are clear - there HAS been no case so far BECAUSE THERE IS NO
CASE. Derek tried to get Bill to back down; Bill didn't, and through Bills
relentless pressure Derek finally caved in and admitted to something he
SWORE he would never do - discuss the details of his PHD.
Shawn Driscoll
--
Shawn Driscoll
http://www.blackboxstudios.com/shonner
marcco <marc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:37d2ea81...@195.74.0.3...
Shawn Driscoll
--
Shawn Driscoll
http://www.blackboxstudios.com/shonner
Dan Snelson <snel...@gte.net> wrote in message
news:eaXA3.726$Fn1....@dfiatx1-snr1.gtei.net...
Bill Huffman
... snip ...
>I have already accumulated several thousand dollars in billed hours
>over this Huffman nonsense since my FLA attorney hired experts to
>investigate the issue, my claims etc and this fee includes that paid
>to an expert on Internet laws, crime and punishment.
I notice that Derek doesn't seem to make reference to spending any
money on NY lawyer fees here? Someone told me via email that in an
interview Mr. Smart said that Eric Rotbard worked on the promise of
being paid after Derek struck it rich. Has anyone heard or read
anything like that? It would also explain why Derek would hire a lawyer
in NY when he's in Florida. It might also explain why Derek would seem
to dismiss Rotbard expenses? I would find it very funny if it were
true.
Kevin Stewart
Allan Parent wrote in message <37D3DFD1...@flash.net>...
>Bill,
>
>I have noticed that when your "score" on derek he always reverts to his
>revisionist defense or just totally ignores the reply. Watch and wait,
>we should be getting a nice big DS rant including the "oh poor me" and
>"I will succeed" lines. Now that the PhD thing is essentially over due
>to his KWU debacle, the focus of the flamewar will shift to the
>"stalking and harassment" issue. I really do not think this will ever
>come to trial. If it hasn't by now, it never will.
Trial or not, this flame war will doubtlessly continue. Maybe the NG's name
should be changed, (to 'Huffman Smart' perhaps)?
If nothing else, that would put all these threads/posts on topic!
- the ghoti
snipped
ScottZf
Kevin Stewart <ke...@jacksonmi.com> wrote in message
news:rtkkai...@corp.supernews.com...
I sent a control message to create a new group a few weeks ago.
alt.flame.dsmart.
This discussion would be on topic there.
If your news server does not carry it, request that they do!
(Of course, I also sent an rmgroup message shortly after, so the group will
not propogate very well)
:-)
Zodiac
"Big" Bill Huffman is the arch rival of Derek 'The Master' Smart they are
arguing over a subject that no one apart from:
Ed 'fucker' Bain
Ted 'fuck off' Chen
Jimmy 'fuck you' Chan
b 'fuck me' p
DARK 'fuck you all' STAR
give the slightest toss about. Hopefully, if we all pull together, we can
get rid of them.