Bill Huffman lies about Dr. Bear.
Ed Bain
Bill Huffman, here is a question or two for you:
On 4/7/99, you, Bill Huffman said this about Dr. Bear:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
in msg <7ecjhu$gmc$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
: "Why should I bother him? He already told me in email back in
: the lawyer days that Mr. Smart was an obvious fraud and that
: he would be happy to testify in court as my expert witness."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, you, Bill Huffman say:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
: On Mon, 06 Sep 1999 22:59:22 GMT,
: in msg <7r1h06$cig$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
: Bill Huffman <huf...@my-deja.com> said :
:
: Yes, as I said "obvious fraud" was my wording not Dr. Bear's wording.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You're not being factual, Bill. Why are you repeatedly contradicting
yourself, and believing that no one notices?
First off, why do you feel the need to drop the name of Dr. Bear
into -your- flamewar?
Why won't you tell the truth, which is that Dr. Bear NEVER said
that Derek was an 'obvious fraud'? Dr. Bear want to comment here?
Bill Huffman is using your name and reputation in a less than
ingenuous way, sir.
Bill, what else on your flamewar's site is a lie? Do you think that
if you bury your obsessive vendetta in a mountain of text that
your -true- motives won't be discovered?
I have repeatedly asked you to clear the matter of Dr. Bear up,
and you have repeatedly refused.
Bill, are you a liar?
--
* rrevved at mindspring dot com
* unit.26 s.p.u.t.u.m.
* http://www.cabal.net
nobr...@unleesrjed.clampet
And if so..... Bill are you gonna get sued by Dr. Bear also ?
Just how big is that Bilbo the Huff nest egg you had racked up for
matching his / her club Med ( ication ) padded cells ? I guess your
going to lose it all now , and just spend your Haldol years at a
public institution. Oh well , easy come , easy go .
Joe
Ed Bain
in msg <37d4d7fe...@news.mindspring.com>,
nobr...@unleesrjed.Clampet (J...@bsfilter.com) said :
Maybe bILL just doesn't like people who claim Ph.D.'s at all. That goes
for Dr. Bear, who he has mis-quoted, and injected into his flamewar.
bILL is shameless in his tactics.
There's probably -nothing- bILL wouldn't do, to attract attention ot
himself.
bee...@my-deja.com
I hate to rain on your parade, but as others have tried to point out
to you, Bill simply paraphrased Dr. Bear. From what I've read from Dr.
Bear's posts, Bill is accurate. Perhaps you would like to go after the
AP for doing the same thing in their news stories?
In article <37d5e82...@news.mindspring.com>,
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Bill Huffman
em...@bottom.com (Ed Bain) wrote:
>
> Bill Huffman, here is a question or two for you:
>
> On 4/7/99, you, Bill Huffman said this about Dr. Bear:
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
>
> in msg <7ecjhu$gmc$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
>
> : "Why should I bother him? He already told me in email back in
> : the lawyer days that Mr. Smart was an obvious fraud and that
> : he would be happy to testify in court as my expert witness."
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
>
> Now, you, Bill Huffman say:
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
>
> : On Mon, 06 Sep 1999 22:59:22 GMT,
> : in msg <7r1h06$cig$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> : Bill Huffman <huf...@my-deja.com> said :
> :
> : Yes, as I said "obvious fraud" was my wording not Dr. Bear's
wording.
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
>
> You're not being factual, Bill. Why are you repeatedly contradicting
> yourself, and believing that no one notices?
Ed, I've never claimed that "obvious fraud" was Dr. Bear's wording.
> First off, why do you feel the need to drop the name of Dr. Bear
> into -your- flamewar?
Mr. Smart's Flame war was going on long before I became envolved.
I referenced Dr. Bear (frequently) in the context of his book and his
a.e.d posts. Dan was the one that was suggesting he be brought into the
flame war. Why do you keep misrepresenting this fact?
> Why won't you tell the truth, which is that Dr. Bear NEVER said
> that Derek was an 'obvious fraud'? Dr. Bear want to comment here?
> Bill Huffman is using your name and reputation in a less than
> ingenuous way, sir.
> Bill, what else on your flamewar's site is a lie?
Ed, this isn't on the flame war site? This isn't a lie and most of the
lies on the flame war site are Mr. Smart's. If you could be a little
more specific maybe I could help you?
> Do you think that
> if you bury your obsessive vendetta in a mountain of text that
> your -true- motives won't be discovered?
I've never tried to hide my motives Ed?
> I have repeatedly asked you to clear the matter of Dr. Bear up,
> and you have repeatedly refused.
Ed, I believe you've spoken another untruth here. Please point out
where I've refused.
> Bill, are you a liar?
Ed, I've offered to withdraw from the flame war if Patrick Muller could
document any lie. He has done this.
--
Bill Huffman
huf...@FRAUDaccess1.net (Remove the FRAUD to email me.)
Bill Huffman
document any lie. He has not done this.
Ed Bain
in msg <7r3baa$ldt$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Bill Huffman <huf...@my-deja.com> said :
Did Dr. Bear ever say that Derek was an 'obvious fraud'?
You told us that he did:
"He already told me in email back in the lawyer days that Mr. Smart
was an obvious fraud "
>> I have repeatedly asked you to clear the matter of Dr. Bear up,
>> and you have repeatedly refused.
>
>Ed, I believe you've spoken another untruth here. Please point out
>where I've refused.
>
Then, answer this question:
Did Dr. Bear state to you in email or otherwise that Derek was
an 'obvious fraud'?
>> Bill, are you a liar?
>
>Ed, I've offered to withdraw from the flame war if Patrick Muller could
>document any lie. He has not done this.
I think you have lied, bILL, and if you are a man of honor you will have
to withdraw. Please answer this question:
Did Dr. Bear state to you in email or otherwise that Derek was
an 'obvious fraud'?
John Bear
Bill Huffman is using your name and reputation in a less than
ingenuous way, sir.
John Bear replies:
I answer hypothetical questions all the time, and don't archive them.
Here's one from this morning:
"If we could prove to you that the fire chief here in [city]
has his fire science degree from Cambridge State University,
would you be available to testify in court as to the legitimacy
of this institution?"
I replied that in my opinion, Cambridge State University is an obvious
fraud, and I would be glad to say that, with plenty of evidence, in a
courtroom.
In the absence of a transcript of what went on with Mr. Huffman, I can
only assume that it was something comparable. If Mr. Huffman has the
transcript, perhaps he will share it.
--
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.
bp
>
>Bill Huffman, here is a question or two for you:
>
>On 4/7/99, you, Bill Huffman said this about Dr. Bear:
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>in msg <7ecjhu$gmc$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
>
> : "Why should I bother him? He already told me in email back in
> : the lawyer days that Mr. Smart was an obvious fraud and that
> : he would be happy to testify in court as my expert witness."
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Now, you, Bill Huffman say:
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> : On Mon, 06 Sep 1999 22:59:22 GMT,
> : in msg <7r1h06$cig$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> : Bill Huffman <huf...@my-deja.com> said :
> :
> : Yes, as I said "obvious fraud" was my wording not Dr. Bear's wording.
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>You're not being factual, Bill. Why are you repeatedly contradicting
>yourself, and believing that no one notices?
>
>First off, why do you feel the need to drop the name of Dr. Bear
>into -your- flamewar?
>
>Why won't you tell the truth, which is that Dr. Bear NEVER said
>that Derek was an 'obvious fraud'?
Ed did Dr. Bear say this ? Or Dan ?
Dr.Bear said he did not remember the exact text of the email, how does
that equal Bill lied?
> Dr. Bear want to comment here?
I believe he did. It seems you and Dan are not content with his
answer.
>Bill Huffman is using your name and reputation in a less than
>ingenuous way, sir.
How is that ?
>
>Bill, what else on your flamewar's site is a lie? Do you think that
>if you bury your obsessive vendetta in a mountain of text that
>your -true- motives won't be discovered?
What is the true motive, Ed?
>
>I have repeatedly asked you to clear the matter of Dr. Bear up,
>and you have repeatedly refused.
Dan asked him and he did indeed reply. It just was not what you
wanted.
When I asked you, Joe, Dan and Patty boy to clear up the obvious lie
Derek made about getting life/work credit you *ALL* fell silent. Now
you think you are on the trail of *finally finding a Bill H lie (and
really not one that means shit as Derek has admitted Billl was correct
)"* and you *all* act like a pack of rabid dogs.
Keep barking up that tree.
BTW in the three years this flame war has been going I am sure NO ONE
as always been 100% truthful in the eyes of the other side.
Even if Bill lied about Dr. Bear actually not saying derek was an
"obvious fraud" it really does not matter because in the end Derek
proved that he was/is a Phd fraud.
I think Dan and Derek just want to continue the war.
Qwibble
Ed Bain
in msg <cl=VN3PjD5kyjoy...@4ax.com>,
Erik <er...@look.headers.net> said :
>In the last episode our hero, Ed Bain, revealed that:
>
>>
>>Bill Huffman, here is a question or two for you:
>>
>>On 4/7/99, you, Bill Huffman said this about Dr. Bear:
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>in msg <7ecjhu$gmc$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
>>
>> : "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."
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> The article to which that Message-ID belongs to doesn't mention any of the
>text above.
>
> Some might think that you're altering the facts to suit your vision.
>
Oops! Sorry about that.
Here is the correct message number:
<7efv00$8il$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
And here is a direct dejanews link:
http://x31.deja.com/=dnc/getdoc.xp?AN=463658035
And here is the entire post in full:
===================== 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 ==============================
>>Now, you, Bill Huffman say:
>>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> : On Mon, 06 Sep 1999 22:59:22 GMT,
>> : in msg <7r1h06$cig$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>> : Bill Huffman <huf...@my-deja.com> said :
>> :
>> : Yes, as I said "obvious fraud" was my wording not Dr. Bear's wording.
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>You're not being factual, Bill. Why are you repeatedly contradicting
>>yourself, and believing that no one notices?
>>
>>First off, why do you feel the need to drop the name of Dr. Bear
>>into -your- flamewar?
>>
>>Why won't you tell the truth, which is that Dr. Bear NEVER said
>>that Derek was an 'obvious fraud'? Dr. Bear want to comment here?
>>Bill Huffman is using your name and reputation in a less than
>>ingenuous way, sir.
>
> Dr. Bear already answered each point.
>
>Message-ID: <john-03099...@caulk24.ppp.lmi.net>
>
>Message-ID: <john-05099...@coat4.ppp.lmi.net>
>
Sorry, that's not true. If you read Dr. Bear's posts, he doesn't
recall the 'conversation' with bILL, and suggested that we should
ask bILL for the proof. Of course, bILL has none.
... next.
Ed Bain
in msg <6mjVN7ycGFg44Z...@4ax.com>,
Erik <er...@look.headers.net> said :
>
> You don't like Bill, don't you?.
Actually, no I don't.
While I understand Bill's campaign of keeping Derek honest
about his Ph.D., and I respect his right to freedom of speech,
I don't like many of his methods for doing so. A good example
is his claim that Dr. Bear told him that Derek was 'an obvious fraud'.
I can't be bothered to repeatedly post what he said, over and over.
Look it up, try to comprehend it, or don't.
PH.D. Fraud Smart
> >
> >On 4/7/99, you, Bill Huffman said this about Dr. Bear:
> >
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
> >
> >in msg <7ecjhu$gmc$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
> >
> > : "Why should I bother him? He already told me in email back in
> > : the lawyer days that Mr. Smart was an obvious fraud and that
> > : he would be happy to testify in court as my expert witness."
> >
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
> >
> >
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
> >
> > : On Mon, 06 Sep 1999 22:59:22 GMT,
> > : in msg <7r1h06$cig$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > : Bill Huffman <huf...@my-deja.com> said :
> > :
> > : Yes, as I said "obvious fraud" was my wording not Dr. Bear's
wording.
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
> >
> >You're not being factual, Bill. Why are you repeatedly contradicting
> >yourself, and believing that no one notices?
> >
> >First off, why do you feel the need to drop the name of Dr. Bear
> >into -your- flamewar?
> >
> >Why won't you tell the truth, which is that Dr. Bear NEVER said
> Ed did Dr. Bear say this ? Or Dan ?
> Dr.Bear said he did not remember the exact text of the email, how does
> that equal Bill lied?
>
> answer.
>
> >ingenuous way, sir.
>
> >
> >Bill, what else on your flamewar's site is a lie? Do you think that
> >if you bury your obsessive vendetta in a mountain of text that
> >your -true- motives won't be discovered?
> What is the true motive, Ed?
>
> >
> >I have repeatedly asked you to clear the matter of Dr. Bear up,
> >and you have repeatedly refused.
> Dan asked him and he did indeed reply. It just was not what you
> wanted.
>
> When I asked you, Joe, Dan and Patty boy to clear up the obvious lie
> Derek made about getting life/work credit you *ALL* fell silent. Now
> you think you are on the trail of *finally finding a Bill H lie (and
> really not one that means shit as Derek has admitted Billl was correct
> )"* and you *all* act like a pack of rabid dogs.
>
> Keep barking up that tree.
> BTW in the three years this flame war has been going I am sure NO ONE
> as always been 100% truthful in the eyes of the other side.
>
> Even if Bill lied about Dr. Bear actually not saying derek was an
> "obvious fraud" it really does not matter because in the end Derek
> proved that he was/is a Phd fraud.
>
> I think Dan and Derek just want to continue the war.
>
> >
> >Bill, are you a liar?
Poor Dan, Eric and other supporters of proven liar and fraud Derek
Smart (fake PH.D.)
Their whole world has fallen around their ears. The man they worshipped
and sucked up to is a admitted liar and PH.D. fraud, but they will not
accept it. They are trying to continue the Flamewar, as it appears it
is the only way to keep BC3000 in the news.
Would anyone please tell me what 2 titles Derek has written? One is
BC3000, what is the other one? he surely doesnt mean V2 of BC3000,
which is only patches to the original to get it to sort of work. Or
does Derek say that every patch version is a different Title?. In that
case Derek must have hundreds of titles.
foamy
>
>Sorry, that's not true. If you read Dr. Bear's posts, he doesn't
>recall the 'conversation' with bILL, and suggested that we should
>ask bILL for the proof. Of course, bILL has none.
A lack of proof didn't stop you though, did it ?
What part of Dr. Bear's post where he indicated he might
very well have stated that, didn't you get ?
Your attempt at covering your behind for leaping to
conclusions and making unsubstantiated accusations
is failing miserably.
Jim
Nai-Chi Lee
Ed Bain <em...@bottom.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 08 Sep 1999 05:13:56 +0900,
>in msg <6mjVN7ycGFg44Z...@4ax.com>,
>Erik <er...@look.headers.net> said :
>> You don't like Bill, don't you?.
>
>Actually, no I don't.
Give it a rest, Ed. You are boring us with your obsession and animosity
toward Bill Huffman. In any case, even if can manage to discredit Bill
Huffman (it looks like you can't), that is not going to change the fact
that Mr. Smart is still an obvious Ph.D. Fraud.
--
Nai-Chi Lee, Ph.D. (SUNY at Stont Brook)
JSPESSAR
fraud" then your argument would have some validity. BUT....he didn't.
So to assume this was a direct quote makes no sense..... I see no
contradiction in Bill's words...........Sorry
Normally, I am content to be a lurker and watch the DS exchanges but
your posts are so annoying, have no substances, and are a complete waste
of bandwidth. I don't know what you are trying to accomplish with these
posts. Perhaps you think that you are being clever.......and feel the
need to show off your skills of logic......
I can not comment on the others in this NG but I can say that you are
doing a wonderful job in swaying my opinion that you are anything but
clever.
J
Ed Bain wrote:
>
> >> Bill Huffman, here is a question or two for you:
> >> On 4/7/99, you, Bill Huffman said this about Dr. Bear:
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> in msg <7ecjhu$gmc$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
> >>
> >> : "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."
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Now, you, Bill Huffman say:
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
jackyo
Ed Bain wrote in message <37d5e82...@news.mindspring.com>...
<snip stuff about Huffman's lies about Dr. Bear>
Actually, Ed, if you *read between the lines*, Dr Bear does cast SERIOUS
doubt upon some of Derek's claims.
Derek claims a COMPLETE phd suppression, yet Dr. Bear said, in his
experience of PHD investigations <over 15 years?> he had *NEVER* heard of
this happening, en toto. Although he does make the point that he learns of
new things every day. I believe him to be a fair and reasonable fellow.
While I respect Dr. Bear's wish not to out and out call Derek a fraud, it
can reasonably be inferred that such a PHD must be viewed as suspect.
I *DO* agree that the statement 'obvious' fraud, as attributed to Dr. Bear
speaking about Derek Smart, is probably untrue.
Dan
John Bear <jo...@ursa.net> wrote in message
news:john-07099...@coat12.ppp.lmi.net...
> >>>Dr. Bear want to comment here?
> ingenuous way, sir.
>
> I answer hypothetical questions all the time, and don't archive them.
> Here's one from this morning:
>
> "If we could prove to you that the fire chief here in [city]
> has his fire science degree from Cambridge State University,
> would you be available to testify in court as to the legitimacy
> of this institution?"
>
> I replied that in my opinion, Cambridge State University is an obvious
> fraud, and I would be glad to say that, with plenty of evidence, in a
> courtroom.
>
> In the absence of a transcript of what went on with Mr. Huffman, I can
> only assume that it was something comparable. If Mr. Huffman has the
> transcript, perhaps he will share it.
Dr Bear, I'm sure you recognize the difference between claiming a university
to be an academic fraud and claiming a specific person a fraud via email
after (supposed) thourough examination of website info from a flamewar
participant. Would that be your modus operandi, to express such an opinion
of a person based upon review of such a "less than independent" site?
There you go, bILL. Permission to post all the email. Please provide
information that validates that Dr Bear reviewed your site in April '98,
that he told you Derek was an obvious fraud and that he agreed to serve as
an expert witness in your defense against a civil suit. There is *no*
reason, bILL, short of a lie that you will not post these emails.
That is precisely why I don't expect to see them.
Archivist, bILL, didn't save the emails. Would that be about right? Or, wa
it the dog ate them? Wait. That was the soopersecret NCR Internet Usage
Policy Guidelines. Nevermind.
Dan
PH.D. Fraud Smart <bc3...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:7r43g6$8mp$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> >
> > >
> > >Bill Huffman, here is a question or two for you:
> > >
> > >On 4/7/99, you, Bill Huffman said this about Dr. Bear:
> > >
> >
> >-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------
> > >
> > >in msg <7ecjhu$gmc$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
> > >
> > > : "Why should I bother him? He already told me in email back in
> > > : he would be happy to testify in court as my expert witness."
> > >
> >
> >-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
> > >
> > >
> >
> >-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> > >
> > > : On Mon, 06 Sep 1999 22:59:22 GMT,
> > > : in msg <7r1h06$cig$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > > : Bill Huffman <huf...@my-deja.com> said :
> > > :
> > > : Yes, as I said "obvious fraud" was my wording not Dr. Bear's
> wording.
> >
> ----------
> > >
> > >You're not being factual, Bill. Why are you repeatedly contradicting
> > >yourself, and believing that no one notices?
> > >
> > >First off, why do you feel the need to drop the name of Dr. Bear
> > >into -your- flamewar?
> > >
> > >Why won't you tell the truth, which is that Dr. Bear NEVER said
> > >that Derek was an 'obvious fraud'?
> > Ed did Dr. Bear say this ? Or Dan ?
> > Dr.Bear said he did not remember the exact text of the email, how does
> > that equal Bill lied?
> >
> > answer.
> >
> > >ingenuous way, sir.
Does anyone else see the immense irony in this? LOLOLOLOLOL
Dan
bp <6b...@home.com> wrote in message
news:37d64d26...@news.mindspring.com...
Well, bILL claimed Dr Bear told him Derek was an obvious fraud. Now bILL
says Dr Bear didn't tell him Derek was an obvious fraud. Want a lie? Pick
one. Either one.
>
> > Dr. Bear want to comment here?
> I believe he did. It seems you and Dan are not content with his
> answer.
Dr Bear has commented in a very professional, careful, non-commital manner.
His comments do not back up bILL's claims.
> >Bill Huffman is using your name and reputation in a less than
> >ingenuous way, sir.
> How is that ?
Try probable lying about Dr Bear's involvement.
> >Bill, what else on your flamewar's site is a lie? Do you think that
> >if you bury your obsessive vendetta in a mountain of text that
> >your -true- motives won't be discovered?
> What is the true motive, Ed?
We are waiting with baited breath for bILL's confession.
> >
> >I have repeatedly asked you to clear the matter of Dr. Bear up,
> >and you have repeatedly refused.
> Dan asked him and he did indeed reply. It just was not what you
> wanted.
bp, you are hilarious.
> When I asked you, Joe, Dan and Patty boy to clear up the obvious lie
> Derek made about getting life/work credit you *ALL* fell silent. Now
> you think you are on the trail of *finally finding a Bill H lie (and
> really not one that means shit as Derek has admitted Billl was correct
> )"* and you *all* act like a pack of rabid dogs.
>
> Keep barking up that tree.
> BTW in the three years this flame war has been going I am sure NO ONE
> as always been 100% truthful in the eyes of the other side.
See, bILL, bp even says you've lied. Yet you claim you have *never* lied in
the flamewar. That makes you a liar according to bp, again.
> Even if Bill lied about Dr. Bear actually not saying derek was an
> "obvious fraud" it really does not matter because in the end Derek
> proved that he was/is a Phd fraud.
Oh, but it does, bp, it does. Sanctimonious bILL, claiming he never lies,
that he is only intersted in truth and justice, in people paying for their
misdeeds, yes, the truths that will soon be published about bill's lies
matter greatly. What was that "first stone"line? bILL will likely prove to
be the bIGGEST hYPOCRITE of them all given his self-righteous claims.
> I think Dan and Derek just want to continue the war.
Absolutely not. I want the truth about bILL hUFFMAN, all of it, and I won't
mind letting everyone else know.
Dan
Patrick Muller <p.mu...@fenomedia.nl> wrote in message
news:37D58C7C...@fenomedia.nl...
>
>
> bp wrote:
>
> > When I asked you, Joe, Dan and Patty boy to clear up the obvious lie
> > Derek made about getting life/work credit you *ALL* fell silent.
>
was an
> error, a deliberate lie, or what had happened in between the two
statements. I've
> seen 'discoveries' like that from the detractors camp a thousand times and
was
> naturally sceptic. BUT, I simply choose not to comment OR speculate on
the matter.
> Derek explained the issue himself later on. Fair enough I would say.
Anything I would
> have said BEFORE that statement would be pure speculation on my part as to
what COULD
> have happened and then I would be operating in the same way the detractors
do.
>
> The observant reader will notice that I NEVER comment on issues that I
don't exaclty
> understand (like the whole education/accredation debates or parts of the
legal debate)
> or on alledged quotes from posts I did not see myself or can't verify
quickly. I could
> go back an do some fact finding but I already explained several times why
I don't do
> that (anymore). Even though I find Bills challenge (him asking me to point
out where
> he lied) extremely tempting! I don't want to do it. I don't know how long
I can
> refrain myself though, I always think of the Vader/Luke/Emperor scene near
the end of
> Return of the Jedi. It helps, but for how long?
>
> > Now
> > you think you are on the trail of *finally finding a Bill H lie (and
> > really not one that means shit as Derek has admitted Billl was correct
> > )"* and you *all* act like a pack of rabid dogs.
>
soon...
An EXCELLENT idea, Patrick!
Dan
Nai-Chi Lee <n...@philabs.research.philips.com> wrote in message
news:7r3v0l$mkh$1...@news.philabs.research.philips.com...
> In article <37d6782c...@news.mindspring.com>,
> Ed Bain <em...@bottom.com> wrote:
> >On Wed, 08 Sep 1999 05:13:56 +0900,
> >in msg <6mjVN7ycGFg44Z...@4ax.com>,
> >Erik <er...@look.headers.net> said :
> >> You don't like Bill, don't you?.
> >
> >Actually, no I don't.
>
> Give it a rest, Ed. You are boring us with your obsession and animosity
> toward Bill Huffman.
God lord, the Irony! And the sad part is that it lost on all of them.
Sniff.
Hey, Nai-Chi, you pretty much said the same thing to bILL about Derek,
right? Huh?
jackyo
Ed Bain wrote in message <37d7cc4b...@news.mindspring.com>...
>
>Why won't you tell the truth, which is that Dr. Bear NEVER said
>that Derek was an 'obvious fraud'? Dr. Bear want to comment here?
>Bill Huffman is using your name and reputation in a less than
>ingenuous way, sir.
>
>Bill, what else on your flamewar's site is a lie? Do you think that
>if you bury your obsessive vendetta in a mountain of text that
>your -true- motives won't be discovered?
>
>I have repeatedly asked you to clear the matter of Dr. Bear up,
>and you have repeatedly refused.
>
>Bill, are you a liar?
>
Heh heh, Ed, you are begining to sound just like Bill !
Are you sure you aren't just an alias of his?
Stranger things have happened here!
jackyo
Dan wrote in message <7r4bu4$k13$1...@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
>
>Absolutely not. I want the truth about bILL hUFFMAN, all of it, and I
won't
>mind letting everyone else know.
>
Seriously, I think this might be going too far?
By doing so, won't you be doing *EXACTLY* what you deride the detractors
for?
No troll bait meant, just curious.
jackyo
Ed Bain wrote in message <37d7c2e7...@news.mindspring.com>...
>"jackyo" <jack...@yahoo.com> said :
>>>
>>>I have repeatedly asked you to clear the matter of Dr. Bear up,
>>>and you have repeatedly refused.
>>>
>>>Bill, are you a liar?
>>>
>>
>>
>>Heh heh, Ed, you are begining to sound just like Bill !
>>
>
>You know, you're right again. I have become more obsessed than
>I want to be, over this whole thing. In my other post, I apologized
>for my recent posts and the fact that I guess I have been in a little
>bit of denial over the fact that DS not only lied for years, but he
>left several of us hanging out to dry. I should have known better,
>but I'm wiser now.. :)
Yes, I just read your other post, thanks. I have a lengthy response over
there, but since it touches upon this thread <the 'Dr. Bear.' thing> I will
repost it :
Ed Bain wrote in message <37d5a691...@news.mindspring.com>...
>On Tue, 7 Sep 1999 19:38:27 -0400,
>in msg <7r46r5$jvo$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net>,
>"jackyo" <jack...@yahoo.com> said :
>>ED -
>>look at this again -
>>Suppose, now, for a moment, that Bill's and Dr. Bear's discussion went
>>something like this :
>>Bill - Dr. Bear, we have a man, Derek Smart, claiming a PHD from a
renowned
>>institution that he refuses to name. He claims to have had his thesis
>>published, then he claims we can't find it because of his middle name, now
>>he says he had to defend it twice, and finally he had it completely
>>suppressed because of copyrighted GAME code.
>>
>>Furthermore, he claims to have recieved it via distance learning, using
work
>>experiences to gain course credit. He says he can get another one in a
>>month.
>>
>>Do such programs exist that are fully accreddited?
>>
>>Dr. Bear - Nope. This sounds to me like a diploma mill scam or some other
>>obvious fraud.
>>
>
>You know, you're right.
Thanks.
I certainly dont claim that is *EXACTLY* how it happened, but anyone without
blinders on <and I certainly think we all wear them, from time to time>
could certainly conceive of this conversation, or one just like it, arising.
>
>I guess I am feeling a little P.O.'d at how many of us have been led on
>by Derek and I have been grasping at virtual straws to prove that he
>was 'exposed' by people who weren't being very honest. I've been
>experiencing a little denial, here. (so kill me).. :)
Heh, heh, no thanks, I will leave the death threats to others.
Seriously, I think that Derek has done a disservice to those people who have
been his most vocal supporters. At the very least, had it been me, I would
have let these people who had been supporting me know from the outset that
there were some 'issues' with the degree. Granted, Derek tells us that Pat,
Dan, Mark Asher, and some Princeton Professor knew this a year ago, but Dan,
at least, seems to have no recollection of this.
Either way, both sides have very little to be proud of here. Sure, Derek
lied to the gaming community about his PHD, but some of the detractors have
been just as bad. When someone went ahead and called Interplay trying to get
them to can Derek, well, I thought that was just plain awful. Sure, I read
all their justifications for it, but despising someone and wanting them
'dead' or 'ruined' are two separate things, in my book. By the same token,
the calling of NCR trying to get Huffman in trouble was just as bad. So
neither side has 'clean' hands.
I think that, when you boil it all down, this entire flamewar has come down
to the statements and credibilty of one man - Derek Smart. And while I would
argue that his *WORDS* have been untruthful, his *ACTIONS* <excepting his
legal threats against Bill Huffman> have been ok by me. What do I mean by
this? Well, in the face of scorn, apathy, whatever, he managed to release a
pretty good game using his OWN freaking resources. How often does this
happen anymore?
Had he kept his mouth shut about PHD's, fast cars, thongs, million bucks,
renowned schools, promised manual completion dates, etc etc etc and simply
DELIVERED the product he did, he would have been just fine by most people
here. But you and I know that when someone makes BIG GRAND claims, there
will ALWAYS be people who are skeptical and want to 'tear' that person down.
Simple human nature. And Derek has always been one to shoot his mouth off,
much to his own detriment. When he quietly discusses his game, I think it
is great. But when he begins 'bragging' on his game, his woman, his cars,
etc he is asking for trouble.
Even such innocous remarks such as 'Heh heh, those screenshots are NOTHING.
The NEW ones will kick so much ass you won't believe it and will set the
industry afire' are HYPE and he CANNOT win by uttering them. Why? Well, if
he delivers, great - no one will be surprised, since he told us about it.
And if he doesnt ? More ammo for the flamewar.
>
>I also think that my posts have been extending the Ph.D. portion of the
>flamewar, and I am sorry for that. I said before that I don't like some
>of the methods used by Bill, and I do like Derek as a person and admire
>his tenaciousness, but hey, all's fair in war and Derek MADE it a war
>by his lying, on this worldwide forum..
Yes, it is sad. Derek seems like a decent guy, by Bill's own admission and
by my brief glimpes of his personality when he is not being poked. I cannot
understand why he would ever have brought up his degree in the first place,
knowing it was unaccreddited. This was SO shortsighted as to be almost
unbelievable.
>
>I am certainly not afraid to be honest enough to back off when I
>am proven wrong.
Which is why I enjoy discussing these things with you. Some people NEVER
admit when they are wrong, apologize, etc. We have too many people
re-writing history here to suit their own ends.
>Again, I let the tree get in the way of the forest
>by not joining in the general disgust for what Derek has done.
Too be honest, there has been less fallout from this than I might have
predicted. Granted, there is now some serious doubt as to whether there
*EVER* was a thesis, but in general the 'clamor' and YEEEEEHHHHAAAAWWWWS
have been pretty few. I think most people are just feeling let down or
outright exhausted.
>
>Bill H., if you're reading this, I'm sorry.
>
>Let my spanking begin... :)
I save a special lash for spankings, but I think it will remain in the
closet for now ; >
Dan
jackyo <jack...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7r4i75$c75$1...@nntp1.atl.mindspring.net...
No, JackyO, I have no intention on keeping it up for 3 years. I will simply
make it unavoidably clear that bILL hUFFMAN is a liar and, considering his
obsessive 3 year jihad, perhaps the most hypocritical person of the bunch.
That shouldn't take long.
> No troll bait meant, just curious.
No problem. You must admit, it's quite hilarious seeing bILL's "toadies"
project the *exact* same arguments and pleas that others gave them. Oh, the
irony. LOL \
Again, the major difference, only the facts, and it will be short and sweet.
How's this twist? If you don't want to read it, use a killfilter. LOL
Travis Hamer
Dan wrote in message <7r4c96$kun$1...@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
Indeed, it is rather funny. In pursuing his monster (Bill Huffman), Ed Bain
has become one himself.
Travis
Bill Lambrukos
Huffman (it looks like you can't), that is not going to change the fact
that Mr. Smart is still an obvious Ph.D. Fraud.<<
It's an old trick we used to use in politics. When your opponent has you by
the nuts (as Huffman has not-so-Smart) start saying something with no
substance, but say it over and over again (in the face of folks trying to
bring reason) and hope some of the shit sticks to the wall.
Bill
--
Rasta Kyle
>In article <37d6782c...@news.mindspring.com>,
>Ed Bain <em...@bottom.com> wrote:
>>On Wed, 08 Sep 1999 05:13:56 +0900,
>>in msg <6mjVN7ycGFg44Z...@4ax.com>,
>>Erik <er...@look.headers.net> said :
>>> You don't like Bill, don't you?.
>>
>>Actually, no I don't.
>
>Give it a rest, Ed. You are boring us with your obsession and animosity
>toward Bill Huffman. In any case, even if can manage to discredit Bill
>Huffman (it looks like you can't), that is not going to change the fact
>that Mr. Smart is still an obvious Ph.D. Fraud.
>--
>Nai-Chi Lee, Ph.D. (SUNY at Stont Brook)
I'm sort of bored with the whole question of what Derek fucking Smart
has as credentials....why would anyone give it two seconds of thought?
I hearby declare I co-invented the internet with Al Gore...put up a
web site debunking this and rail about it for 2 or 3 years...it could
keep a person busy for a bit eh? Sounds like a bunch of fun huh?
Ed Bain
in msg <7r4f64$ek1$1...@nntp1.atl.mindspring.net>,
"jackyo" <jack...@yahoo.com> said :
>
>Ed Bain wrote in message <37d7cc4b...@news.mindspring.com>...
>
>>
>>Why won't you tell the truth, which is that Dr. Bear NEVER said
>>that Derek was an 'obvious fraud'? Dr. Bear want to comment here?
>>Bill Huffman is using your name and reputation in a less than
>>ingenuous way, sir.
>>
>>Bill, what else on your flamewar's site is a lie? Do you think that
>>if you bury your obsessive vendetta in a mountain of text that
>>your -true- motives won't be discovered?
>>
>>I have repeatedly asked you to clear the matter of Dr. Bear up,
>>and you have repeatedly refused.
>>
>>Bill, are you a liar?
>>
>
>
>Heh heh, Ed, you are begining to sound just like Bill !
>
You know, you're right again. I have become more obsessed than
I want to be, over this whole thing. In my other post, I apologized
for my recent posts and the fact that I guess I have been in a little
bit of denial over the fact that DS not only lied for years, but he
left several of us hanging out to dry. I should have known better,
but I'm wiser now.. :)
Quatoria, er, BrotherGrimm, er, Nevermind...
soon as you start creating attack threads in the neverending flame war
that is this topic, you start the downward spiral towards
institutionalization. Just do a few dozen backflips, hop up here on
the sideline bleachers, and snipe at people for idle amusement. It's
MUCH easier on the nerves, and so much more fun!
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
Bill Lambrukos
Sniff.<<
What you fail to understand is that Huffman has said it was probably not a
direct quote, and Bear has said he may have said it. There isn't an issue
here. Do you realize how foolish you appear ?
Bill
Jimmy Chan
wrote:
>I'm sort of bored with the whole question of what Derek fucking Smart
>has as credentials....why would anyone give it two seconds of thought?
Maybe you should ask that of DS. DS has been perpetrating a lie with
regards to his PhD credentials for how many years? DS has been
leading his supporters on and in which they have been trying to defend
him for how many years with his fake PhD credentials? DS has used his
fake PhD credentials in AI to scam people into believing that he has
created a game with a neural net AI. DS has used his fake PhD
credentials to scam people into believing that he has an extensive
computing background because of his claims that he used his 'life
experiences' to claim a fake PhD.
Kevin McGuire
: >>God lord, the Irony! And the sad part is that it lost on all of them.
: Sniff.<<
Actually, I'm not sure that he does. Dan seems to post whatever inane
garbage he thinks will score points, to the extent where I'd be surprised
if even he believed what he writes.
Most surprisingly, Derek lying about having told Dan about his fake PhD
doesn't seem to have entered Dan's consciousness. I know we've all seen
hypocritical screeds on the usenet, but the extent of Dan's craven
behavior is just amazing to me. I wonder what satisfaction he gets out of
it; there must be some, else he wouldn't devote so much time to it.
--
Kevin McGuire
University of Pennsylvania
#Remove the 2 "moo" to reply#
bp
>> >
>> >Why won't you tell the truth, which is that Dr. Bear NEVER said
>> >that Derek was an 'obvious fraud'?
>> Dr.Bear said he did not remember the exact text of the email, how does
>> that equal Bill lied?
>
>Well, bILL claimed Dr Bear told him Derek was an obvious fraud. Now bILL
>says Dr Bear didn't tell him Derek was an obvious fraud. Want a lie? Pick
>one. Either one.
>>
>> > Dr. Bear want to comment here?
>> answer.
>
>Dr Bear has commented in a very professional, careful, non-commital manner.
>His comments do not back up bILL's claims.
him up MUCH more then they don't. You are just nuts.
>
>> >Bill Huffman is using your name and reputation in a less than
>> >ingenuous way, sir.
>
>Try probable lying about Dr Bear's involvement.
Oh I see...you can change your wording but when bill does it he is
lying ?? LOL
>
>> >Bill, what else on your flamewar's site is a lie? Do you think that
>> >if you bury your obsessive vendetta in a mountain of text that
>> >your -true- motives won't be discovered?
>> What is the true motive, Ed?
>
>We are waiting with baited breath for bILL's confession.
1. You are not ED
2. That's your motive not bill's
3. You're grabbing at straws to prove someone is a liar yet you backup
the *BIGGEST* Known and admitted liar on the NG LOL.
4. You have become nothing but a bothersome little Nat.
>> >
>> >I have repeatedly asked you to clear the matter of Dr. Bear up,
>> >and you have repeatedly refused.
>> Dan asked him and he did indeed reply. It just was not what you
>> wanted.
>
>bp, you are hilarious.
your just sorry.
Did he or did he not reply ?
His reply backs up Bills you just can't admit it.
Seeya LOSER!
>
>> When I asked you, Joe, Dan and Patty boy to clear up the obvious lie
>> Derek made about getting life/work credit you *ALL* fell silent. Now
>> you think you are on the trail of *finally finding a Bill H lie (and
>> really not one that means shit as Derek has admitted Billl was correct
>> )"* and you *all* act like a pack of rabid dogs.
>>
>> Keep barking up that tree.
>> BTW in the three years this flame war has been going I am sure NO ONE
>> as always been 100% truthful in the eyes of the other side.
>
>See, bILL, bp even says you've lied. Yet you claim you have *never* lied in
>the flamewar. That makes you a liar according to bp, again.
>
>> Even if Bill lied about Dr. Bear actually not saying derek was an
>> "obvious fraud" it really does not matter because in the end Derek
>> proved that he was/is a Phd fraud.
>
>Oh, but it does, bp, it does. Sanctimonious bILL, claiming he never lies,
>that he is only intersted in truth and justice, in people paying for their
>misdeeds, yes, the truths that will soon be published about bill's lies
>matter greatly. What was that "first stone"line? bILL will likely prove to
>be the bIGGEST hYPOCRITE of them all given his self-righteous claims.
>
>> I think Dan and Derek just want to continue the war.
>
bp
>Dr Bear has commented in a very professional, careful, non-commital manner.
>His comments do not back up bILL's claims.
they do not refute them.
Matter of fact they back him up much more than your perceived lie.
you are becoming a bothersome little nat.
bp
>
>Patrick Muller <p.mu...@fenomedia.nl> wrote in message
>news:37D58C7C...@fenomedia.nl...
>>
>>
>> bp wrote:
>>
>> > Now
>> > you think you are on the trail of *finally finding a Bill H lie (and
>> > really not one that means shit as Derek has admitted Billl was correct
>> > )"* and you *all* act like a pack of rabid dogs.
>>
>> Gee you sound just like a supporter... I might start calling you toady
>soon...
>
>An EXCELLENT idea, Patrick!
>
And you two sound like idiots.
>
jsmi...@my-deja.com
Exactly.His fraud is well known now, and you can expect to read about
it soon in most gaming magazines, since I am sure many detractors will
send this information to them.
Smart has blown it big time. He has strung along his supporters like
Clueless Dan, only to pull the rug out from under their feet. Even
know, hypocrite Dan doesn't see the hypocricy involved in calling
Huffman a liar while ignoring Derek's latest lie, that Derek told Dan
and Pat a year ago that his school was unaccredditted.
Brad Martin
You know Dan, I just read a post by you where you state that Bill
Huffman is the biggest hypocrite in this n.g. This seems to be based
on the fact that Bill *may* have mis-represented something which Dr
Bear said to him in an E-mail. I don't know the truth of this, It
hasn't been resolved either way yet, Bill maybe a hypocrite on this
matter, if he turns out to be I would be happy to tell him. But some
other matters seem to have got by you. A certain person who has been
ranting, threatening, abusing, boring and vilifying anybody who dared
to say he did not have an accredited Phd for YEARS on this n.g. has
just admitted he didn't have an accredited Phd. The entire flamewar
was based on his insistence that he had an accredited Phd and all the
time he DIDN'T. He also recently stated that *you* were aware of this
fact a year ago which *you* say you wasn't. I have a feeling that a
quick straw pole of any halfway sane follower of this fiasco would
tend to say that Derek is the biggest hypocrite in this n.g.
What do you think?
I don't think you really understand irony Dan.
brad
Courageous
> > Their whole world has fallen around their ears. The man they worshipped
> > and sucked up to is a admitted liar and PH.D. fraud, but they will not
> > accept it. They are trying to continue the Flamewar, as it appears it
> > is the only way to keep BC3000 in the news.
>
> Does anyone else see the immense irony in this? LOLOLOLOLOL
It's amazing, really, that it has taken people this long
to see it.
C/
Patrick Muller
bp wrote:
> >> Gee you sound just like a supporter... I might start calling you toady
> >soon...
> >
> >An EXCELLENT idea, Patrick!
> >
> And you two sound like idiots.
> >
BP, It takes one to know one..
Now, let's all get butnaked and dance! LOL!
<1,2, cha cha cha, 3, 4 ...>
-Patrick
Dan
Brad Martin <br...@zakalwe.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:37d68f2c...@news.demon.co.uk...
> On Tue, 7 Sep 1999 19:53:50 -0500, "Dan" <d...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >PH.D. Fraud Smart <bc3...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> >news:7r43g6$8mp$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> >> In article <37d64d26...@news.mindspring.com>,
> >> 6b...@home.com (bp) wrote:
>
> >> and sucked up to is a admitted liar and PH.D. fraud, but they will not
> >> accept it. They are trying to continue the Flamewar, as it appears it
> >> is the only way to keep BC3000 in the news.
> >
> >Does anyone else see the immense irony in this? LOLOLOLOLOL
>
> Huffman is the biggest hypocrite in this n.g. This seems to be based
> on the fact that Bill *may* have mis-represented something which Dr
> Bear said to him in an E-mail.
That is only one small facet.
Dan
Bill Lambrukos <hel...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:HvlB3.8756$P72.1...@wbnws01.ne.mediaone.net...
> >>God lord, the Irony! And the sad part is that it lost on all of them.
> Sniff.<<
>
> What you fail to understand is that Huffman has said it was probably not a
> direct quote, and Bear has said he may have said it. There isn't an issue
> here. Do you realize how foolish you appear ?
Bill, what you fail to realize is that bILL has only claimed it was not a
direct quote after being called on it. His original statement was very
direct and unqualified. Further, bILL the "evidence man" has been given the
green light by Dr Bear to produce the email. If the email backs up even a
shade of the story told by bILL it would be produced. So far it has not.
Lastly, this issue is only one of 3 regarding bILL's claims of early 1998.
He has been completely mum, as has Dr Bear on the other 2. If you don't
care I don't blame you a bit.
jackyo
jsmi...@my-deja.com wrote in message <7r5uva$j6p$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
While I can appreciate the points you make about the apparent hypocricy of
some of the 'supporters' in not lambasting Derek for his own lies and
hypocricy, you need to relax a bit. I am sure that some of the detractors
will make sure his PHD fraud is exposed to the media, but you shouldn't
assume that they will publish articles and expose's about it. I don't think
anyone outside this newsgroup and maybe a few others that Derek bragged
about his PHD to, really cares.
Patrick Muller
> <snip> Even
> know, hypocrite Dan doesn't see the hypocricy involved in calling
> Huffman a liar while ignoring Derek's latest lie, that Derek told Dan
> and Pat a year ago that his school was unaccredditted.
Hmm Smirkey. I'm not sure (and neither was he saying he either said it or
hinted as much)
Dan doesn't recall, but I DO remember Derek indicating something to that
affect in a cc'd message about a year ago. If I'm not mistaken this was
during fthx's 'graceful' retreat from the flamewar (bet you remember that
one Dan, ;-)) when there was a fair amount of private mailing/cc-ing going
on (those where the days..). I must have re-installed my system 10 times
since then though. So don't hold your breath.
-Patrick
Steve Woodward
Dan wrote:
> Bill, what you fail to realize is that bILL has only claimed it was not a
> direct quote after being called on it. His original statement was very
> direct and unqualified. Further, bILL the "evidence man" has been given
the
> green light by Dr Bear to produce the email. If the email backs up even a
> shade of the story told by bILL it would be produced. So far it has not.
For the love of God man, are you an idiot or do you just play one on tv?
This is such a non-issue.
Build at bridge and get over it. Dan, I beginning to suspect that you are
the only one who actually understands your post. Don't fear, with the proper
medication you can live a productive life. You got creamed this round...deal
with it.
Ajax
Steve Woodward
> For the love of god, can you please prefix these posts with bc3k or
> something so we dont have to read this tripe, as it is just getting
> beyond now.
I am wicked sorry Kevin. I assumed that considering the thread I posted this
under everyone could REASONABLY deduce what this post would be dealing with.
I am sorry if I FORCED you the read anything that you deem inappropriate.
However, I do want to thank you for holding me responsible for what YOU
read...it is indeed an honor :)
Ajax
Steve Woodward
--
Louis J.M wrote:
> For the love of common sense - Dan is trolling. Nobody is that-dense.
> And those that are can't operate a computer this far. You only make
> yourself look even stupider trying to reason with him (Or any other
> popular character here FTM).
Actually I have followed this thing for longer than I care to admit. No, Dan
isn't trolling...he ate to many lead chips in his youth. To say he is
trolling suggest that he actually does not believe the stuff he is
writing....I think you give him far to much credit. :P
> You could say Dan is a reincarnation of one of Andy Kauffman's ghosts,
> except without charisma or class. (S)
No you can't, Mr. Kauffman was funny, not pathetic.
Ajax
Dan
Steve Woodward <woodw...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:7r70f0$roq$1...@oak.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
When then, as long as apologies are in order;
To your prior post to me, where you said "For the love of God man, are you
an idiot or do you just play one on tv?
This is such a non-issue.
Build at bridge and get over it. Dan, I beginning to suspect that you are
the only one who actually understands your post. Don't fear, with the proper
medication you can live a productive life. You got creamed this round...deal
with it."
I am wicked sorry Ajax. I assumed that considering the thread I posted this
Dan
Louis J.M <Lou...@BellSouth.Net> wrote in message
news:jFDB3.976$K04....@news4.mia...
> In article <7r6tep$i25$1...@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net> , "Steve Woodward"
> <woodw...@earthlink.net> wrote:
<snip>
> Dan is a simple asshole with a simple understanding of grammar who
> indulges in takes advantage of the things we take for advantage.
Nice job, louie. LOL Excellent dislay of your superiority.
Oh, and who's the "troll" again? LOL
Riboflavin
>I am wicked sorry Kevin.
Well, thanks for your apology but you're giving it to the wrong person. You
haven't done anything to me that you should apologize for.
>I assumed that considering the thread I posted this
>under everyone could REASONABLY deduce what this post would be dealing
with.
Actually, if someone has the normal subjects for BC3K posts killfiled, a
post without any of the magic terms will probably still show up in their
newsreader no matter what thread the post is posted in.
--
Kevin Allegood ribotr...@mindspring.pants.com
Remove the pants from my email address to reply
"Ever see Tremors? See when the worm chomped on the tire when it thought
it was going to get the hero? That's because worms don't know it's not
Kevin Bacon." - China Blue
Kevin L Sparrow
<woodw...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>Dan wrote:
>> Bill, what you fail to realize is that bILL has only claimed it was not a
>> direct quote after being called on it. His original statement was very
>> direct and unqualified. Further, bILL the "evidence man" has been given
>the
>> green light by Dr Bear to produce the email. If the email backs up even a
>> shade of the story told by bILL it would be produced. So far it has not.
>
>For the love of God man, are you an idiot or do you just play one on tv?
>This is such a non-issue.
>Build at bridge and get over it. Dan, I beginning to suspect that you are
>the only one who actually understands your post. Don't fear, with the proper
>medication you can live a productive life. You got creamed this round...deal
>with it.
>
>Ajax
>
>
>
For the love of god, can you please prefix these posts with bc3k or
something so we dont have to read this tripe, as it is just getting
beyond now.
--
Road to Moscow web site:-
http://www.wargamer.com/rtm
Contributor-Fighting Steel section:-
http://www.wargamer.com/fs/
Ed Bain
in msg <37dbffea...@news.freeserve.net>,
no...@co.uk (Kevin L Sparrow) said :
>For the love of god, can you please prefix these posts with bc3k or
>something so we dont have to read this tripe, as it is just getting
>beyond now.
For the love of god, can you please prefix these god posts with deity or
something so we don't have to read your tripe?
Louis J.M
<woodw...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> For the love of God man, are you an idiot or do you just play one on tv?
> This is such a non-issue.
> Build at bridge and get over it. Dan, I beginning to suspect that you are
> the only one who actually understands your post. Don't fear, with the proper
> medication you can live a productive life. You got creamed this round...deal
> with it.
For the love of common sense - Dan is trolling. Nobody is that-dense.
And those that are can't operate a computer this far. You only make
yourself look even stupider trying to reason with him (Or any other
popular character here FTM).
Dan is a simple asshole with a simple understanding of grammar who
indulges in takes advantage of the things we take for advantage.
Such as:
- The abundance of X rated pictures on the internet.
- The safety and freedom of expression of Usenet.
Dan thinks it's fun pissing people off in the comfort and safety of his
own home without worry of having the living shit kicked out of him.
I know this because I dared him to call me (Collect!) and say that on
the phone - and he declined. Ignored it in essence, then pressed, replied
with some stupid insult.
You could say Dan is a reincarnation of one of Andy Kauffman's ghosts,
except without charisma or class. (S)
.-~~-.____ Louis J.M
/ | ' \
( ) O _
\_/-, ,----' // E-Mail: Lou...@BellSouth.net
==== ___// WWW : Coming Soon!
/ \-'~; /~~~(O)----------------------------------------------------
/ __/~| __/ |I cannot believe that God plays dice with the cosmos.
==(______| (_________|
Ed Bain
in msg <jFDB3.976$K04....@news4.mia>,
"Louis J.M" <Lou...@BellSouth.Net> said :
>Dan is a simple asshole with a simple understanding of grammar who
>indulges in takes advantage of the things we take for advantage.
[snicker #200]
>E-Mail: Lou...@BellSouth.net
[snicker #201]
Hey Louis. You didn't get that post, from earlier today, cancelled
fast enough. I'm too quick for you.
Bill Huffman
"Dan" <d...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> Bill Lambrukos <hel...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
> news:HvlB3.8756$P72.1...@wbnws01.ne.mediaone.net...
> > >>God lord, the Irony! And the sad part is that it lost on all of
them.
> > Sniff.<<
> >
> > What you fail to understand is that Huffman has said it was
probably not a
> > direct quote, and Bear has said he may have said it. There isn't
an issue
> > here. Do you realize how foolish you appear ?
>
not a
> direct quote after being called on it. His original statement was
very
> direct and unqualified. Further, bILL the "evidence man" has been
given the
> green light by Dr Bear to produce the email. If the email backs up
even a
> shade of the story told by bILL it would be produced. So far it has
not.
A big concern I have is that Dr. Bear was proposing to charge me such a
small fee that people might come to the wrong conclusion and think that
John Bear wasn't worth more money. I think he was just being kind and
generous and maybe felt it to be unfair that a PhD fraud would try to
bully the person that exposed his fraud just because he had lots of
money?
> Lastly, this issue is only one of 3 regarding bILL's claims of early
1998.
> He has been completely mum, as has Dr Bear on the other 2. If you
don't
> care I don't blame you a bit.
I assume you mean about him reviewing the
http://www.angelfire.com/ca/PhDFraud web site and agreeing to be an
expert witness? Those are both the truth. Though no definite commitment
could be made, of course. There was no suit filed yet and I did tell
him that it looked highly unlikely that Derek would really sue. So it
was all very hypothetical. IIRC, Dr. Bear didn't even bother reviewing
the whole site, I assume because the academic fraud was so obvious he
didn't need too? (Remember I have right at the front that Derek claims
it was accredited and that the dissertation is not listed.)
BTW Dan, have you decided what broken pledge you'd like to make yet if
you're proven wrong about this? I would like to propose two pledges to
make it impossible for you to break all your pledges.
1) You pledge to apologize for calling me liar.
2) You pledge to break the above pledge.
--
Bill Huffman
huf...@FRAUDaccess1.net (Remove the FRAUD to email me.)
nobr...@unleesrjed.clampet
<Lou...@BellSouth.Net> wrote:
>In article <7r6tep$i25$1...@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net> , "Steve Woodward"
><woodw...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> For the love of God man, are you an idiot or do you just play one on tv?
>> This is such a non-issue.
>> Build at bridge and get over it. Dan, I beginning to suspect that you are
>> the only one who actually understands your post. Don't fear, with the proper
>> medication you can live a productive life. You got creamed this round...deal
>> with it.
>
>For the love of common sense - Dan is trolling. Nobody is that-dense.
>And those that are can't operate a computer this far. You only make
>yourself look even stupider trying to reason with him (Or any other
>popular character here FTM).
>
>Dan is a simple asshole with a simple understanding of grammar who
>indulges in takes advantage of the things we take for advantage.
>
>Such as:
>
>- The abundance of X rated pictures on the internet.
>
>- The safety and freedom of expression of Usenet.
>
>Dan thinks it's fun pissing people off in the comfort and safety of his
>own home without worry of having the living shit kicked out of him.
>
>I know this because I dared him to call me (Collect!) and say that on
>the phone - and he declined. Ignored it in essence, then pressed, replied
>with some stupid insult.
>
Well no shit , declined the waste of electrons, and oxygen use from
dealing with a penniless loser , hahahaha , yeah Dan is , " weird "
, I guess : P
>You could say Dan is a reincarnation of one of Andy Kauffman's ghosts,
>except without charisma or class. (S)
>
> .-~~-.____ Louis J.M
> / | ' \
>( ) O _
> \_/-, ,----' // E-Mail: Lou...@BellSouth.net
> ==== ___// WWW : Coming Soon!
> / \-'~; /~~~(O)----------------------------------------------------
> / __/~| __/ |I cannot believe that God plays dice with the cosmos.
>==(______| (_________|
Oh shit , we have the idiot -savant , child prodigy , ... Louis
telling us about being , dense , ignorant, stupid, pompous ,
ill-informed, a horse's ass, an abusive minor, ... a potential felon
, a case for Ritalin , and or PINS . Louis , do yourself a favor ,
detach your 17 year old behind from the argument . I would imagine
the faces of Florida state troopers on your door step would have made
you , or any sane person say , fuck this , "past Time " . Then again
there are shitloads of junkies that puke all over themselves, smell
like shit , and still perceive their , "past time " as being
psychologically , " constructive ". To each their own ( nightmare )
Joe
jsmi...@my-deja.com
I won't - but since Dan denies it, I am very given to believing Mr.
Smart lied about this as well.
Say, Patrick, do you conone being lied to and used as ammunition by Mr.
Smart <unacredited> in the flame war? Do you htink Derek did the right
thing by lying to all the gamers he says he 'serves?'
Louis J.M
<d...@earthlink.net> laughed:
> Louis J.M <Lou...@BellSouth.Net> wrote in message
> news:jFDB3.976$K04....@news4.mia...
>> In article <7r6tep$i25$1...@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net> , "Steve Woodward"
>> <woodw...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> <snip>
>
>> Dan is a simple asshole with a simple understanding of grammar who
>> indulges in takes advantage of the things we take for advantage.
>
> Nice job, louie. LOL Excellent dislay of your superiority.
Thanks.
> Oh, and who's the "troll" again? LOL
You must lead a very boring, pathetic existance if you're that easily
amused.
bp
<p.mu...@fenomedia.nl> wrote:
>
>
>bp wrote:
>
>> >> Gee you sound just like a supporter... I might start calling you toady
>> >soon...
>> >
>> >An EXCELLENT idea, Patrick!
>> >
>> And you two sound like idiots.
>> >
>
>BP, It takes one to know one..
It takes one to know one ???
Gee Pat do you think these up yourself or do you have help ?
Christ I used that one in the first grade and I used my nifty
comeback (above) starting in the second grade.
>Now, let's all get butnaked and dance! LOL!
Is this what you Derek and Dan like to do on Friday nights ? Leave me
out of it.
>
><1,2, cha cha cha, 3, 4 ...>
>
Drunk ?? Stoned ?? all of the above ?
>
>
>-Patrick
Louis J.M
nobr...@unleesrjed.Clampet (J...@bsfilter.com) wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Sep 1999 09:00:37 +0800, "Louis J.M"
> <Lou...@BellSouth.Net> wrote:
>
>>In article <7r6tep$i25$1...@holly.prod.itd.earthlink.net> , "Steve Woodward"
>><woodw...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>> For the love of God man, are you an idiot or do you just play one on tv?
>>> This is such a non-issue.
>>> Build at bridge and get over it. Dan, I beginning to suspect that you are
>>> the only one who actually understands your post. Don't fear, with the proper
>>> medication you can live a productive life. You got creamed this round...deal
>>> with it.
>>
>>For the love of common sense - Dan is trolling. Nobody is that-dense.
>>And those that are can't operate a computer this far. You only make
>>yourself look even stupider trying to reason with him (Or any other
>>popular character here FTM).
>>
>>Dan is a simple asshole with a simple understanding of grammar who
>>indulges in takes advantage of the things we take for advantage.
>>
>>Such as:
>>
>>- The abundance of X rated pictures on the internet.
>>
>>- The safety and freedom of expression of Usenet.
>>
>>Dan thinks it's fun pissing people off in the comfort and safety of his
>>own home without worry of having the living shit kicked out of him.
>>
>>I know this because I dared him to call me (Collect!) and say that on
>>the phone - and he declined. Ignored it in essence, then pressed, replied
>>with some stupid insult.
>>
> Well no shit , declined the waste of electrons, and oxygen use from
> dealing with a penniless loser , hahahaha , yeah Dan is , " weird "
> , I guess : P
>
>
>>You could say Dan is a reincarnation of one of Andy Kauffman's ghosts,
>>except without charisma or class. (S)
>>
>> .-~~-.____ Louis J.M
>> / | ' \
>>( ) O _
>> \_/-, ,----' // E-Mail: Lou...@BellSouth.net
>> ==== ___// WWW : Coming Soon!
>> / \-'~; /~~~(O)----------------------------------------------------
>> / __/~| __/ |I cannot believe that God plays dice with the cosmos.
>>==(______| (_________|
>
> Oh shit , we have the idiot -savant , child prodigy , ... Louis
> telling us about being , dense , ignorant, stupid, pompous ,
> ill-informed, a horse's ass, an abusive minor, ... a potential felon
> , a case for Ritalin , and or PINS .
The space goes AFTER the comma!
> Louis , do yourself a favor ,
> detach your 17 year old behind from the argument . I would imagine
> the faces of Florida state troopers on your door step would have made
> you , or any sane person say , fuck this , "past Time " .
That does not mean however, that my first amendment rights are taken
away. I am in full compliance with what was requested. The law could
do is a great service though, pulling your plug.
[Snip]
Patrick Muller
jsmi...@my-deja.com wrote:
When did that happen? When/Where did Derek lie to me?
> Do you htink Derek did the right
> thing by lying to all the gamers he says he 'serves?'
See above. The (less then shocking) contradiction was quickly 'defused' by
Dr. Smart himself.
Bill Huffman is tired, he's been going at it for years now. The latest
event gave him a way out and he is now trying to convince everyone that
Derek is a fraud because of his latest 'admission. He even used the good
name of Dr. Bear to add a silver lining to his claim of victory. Somehow
all the detractors cheered like idiots, ignoring the fact that NOTHING was
proved. Bill could very well be a cyber-hypnotist.
DAKTARI!
Patrick Muller <p.mu...@fenomedia.nl> wrote in message
news:37D7F75B...@fenomedia.nl...
I have got to look into the quality of higher education in the Netherlands
if Derek Smart's Ph.d is being accepted there.
I went to a real school!
--
DAKTARI!
histo...@hotmail.com
jackyo
Patrick Muller wrote in message <37D7F75B...@fenomedia.nl>...
>> Do you htink Derek did the right
>> thing by lying to all the gamers he says he 'serves?'
>
>See above. The (less then shocking) contradiction was quickly 'defused' by
>Dr. Smart himself.
>Bill Huffman is tired, he's been going at it for years now. The latest
>event gave him a way out and he is now trying to convince everyone that
>Derek is a fraud because of his latest 'admission. He even used the good
>name of Dr. Bear to add a silver lining to his claim of victory. Somehow
>all the detractors cheered like idiots, ignoring the fact that NOTHING was
>proved. Bill could very well be a cyber-hypnotist.
>
Maybe you missed the post, Pat, but derek DID say that his PHD was, in fact,
NON accreddited. So, to say nothing was 'proved', is inaccurate.
Kevin McGuire
: Louis J.M wrote:
: > You could say Dan is a reincarnation of one of Andy Kauffman's ghosts,
: > except without charisma or class. (S)
: No you can't, Mr. Kauffman was funny, not pathetic.
On Taxi, he was funny. Near the end, when he got involved with
wrestling, particularly women, he was pathetic.
And insane. Or both.
--
Kevin McGuire
University of Pennsylvania
#Remove the 2 "moo" to reply#
Bill Huffman
"Dan" <d...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> Brad Martin <br...@zakalwe.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:37d68f2c...@news.demon.co.uk...
> > You know Dan, I just read a post by you where you state that Bill
> > Huffman is the biggest hypocrite in this n.g. This seems to be based
> > on the fact that Bill *may* have mis-represented something which Dr
> > Bear said to him in an E-mail.
>
> That is only one small facet.
So what's it going to be. You have called me a liar hundreds of times.
You've specified the lie I was supposed to have told a few times and
have been proven incorrect on all counts. You've said you were sure
about this one being a lie. are you going to crow or pledge?
--
Bill Huffman
huf...@RIBOSPANTSaccess1.net (Remove the RIBO'S PANTS to email me.)
Thomas Nixon
groups? It doesn't relate to our group and the time where it briefly
did (vis a vis Dr. Bear) has long since passed.
Thank you for your help.
Tom Nixon
LShaping@...
You deleted the subject line. Everyone who isn't following that
thread, and maybe those who are, probably have no idea what you are
talking about. Also, you could try ignoring the thread, whatever
thread that might be. And why on Earth didn't you delete that group
from your post? Strange. You think yourself the leader of that group
and yet you appear to have no idea what you are doing.
Good luck,
LShaping.
Quatoria, er, BrotherGrimm, er, Nevermind...
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
Jimmy Chan
subject line as a new thread and some readers seeing this wouldn't
know what was being discussed since the thread may appear to be new.
For those that are using readers that thread by subject, they wouldn't
even see the post so that kind of defeats the purpose of jumping into
the thread, while actually creating a new thread, that asks to remove
a.e.d. It is also strange that Thomas Nixon didn't remove the
alt.education.distance in the newsgroups line for anyone following up.
I've removed the first two newsgroups.
Larry McQueary
Ph.D. being cross-posted to a.e.d?
C'mon, pass me that hash pipe. ;-)
Thanks,
Larry
Jimmy Chan <jimmy@*nospam*hgea.org> wrote in message
news:37e005a0....@netnews.worldnet.att.net...
Thomas Nixon
Jimmy Chan wrote:
It is also strange that Thomas Nixon didn't remove the
> alt.education.distance in the newsgroups line for anyone following up.
> I've removed the first two newsgroups.
Not strange at all. Periodically this occurs where a non-relevant
discussion goes on forever in this newsgroup. Usually one of the regulars
eventually posts a message similar to what I did. As a courtesy, they often
leave the AED group attached so that others know that it has been done.
Tom Nixon