On DLtruth
jackson Wrote:
>If two people on the list had not said they read the paper and that it
was worthy of publication, I would not have >chimed in on sci.math and
said so. You know that ... or you don't know anything about me at all. I
don't always >say stuff people agree with -- but when I say something, I
say it in good faith. Andrew Beckwith -- eccentric as he >is -- came out
and confessed to being one of the two. Neilist knows that. Beckwith's PhDs
are in physics and >mathematics, I believe ... can't recall from where. Yes
-- he's quite the character -- but there's one. A whack of >published
papers behind 'm if recollection serves me right.
>So essentially this is all about my not revealing the name of the second
math person who read the paper and said >it stood. If you belong to a
group, and one of the rules of member****p is that other members' info is
to be kept >confidential -- it is unethical to reveal that information.
>So don't tell me about ethics or dishonesty. Beckwith (and another fellow
-- a non-mathematician) self-identified >on sci.math. The other fellow did
not elect to do so -- so his name ain't coming from me. Just because
Neilist's >nonsense skips like an old disco record doesn't make it so.
Just because he is trying to extort me into doing >things his way or the
highway ... well ... I'm a stubborn **** when it comes to doing what
people tell me just >because they tell me.
More lies from Quinn - he says that I "know" some guy Beckwith came
forward. Unless Quinn can back THAT up, he weaves yet more lies. Let
Quinn dredge up a sci.math post about it, because I don't remember or
"know" any such thing.
Amazing! Quinn represents that he heard that a paper was reviewed by
a "closed list", so Quinn passed on such rumors as facts, with the
backstory being a crank James Harris who was seeking recognition from
the mathematical community by publi****ng a math paper.
And only now is Quinn fessing up that one of the reviewers of a
mathematical paper in the alleged "closed list" was "a non-
mathematician".
Quinn also says he knows that Beckwith is "eccentric" and a
"character", but Quinn still sees nothing wrong with making such
representations of a "review" by an eccentric of a mathematical paper
as though they are facts.
The eccentricity of this Beckwith fellow and the review of a non-
mathematicians casts a harsh light on this supposed review of the
paper. And also casts a harsh and damning light on the Quinn's
bull**** high-IQ society behind the alleged "closed list".
Of course, years ago, Quinn did not characterize to sci.math that this
reviewer Beckwith was eccentric, nor of the other reviewer being a non-
mathematician. Quinn's "closed list" excuse conveniently hid such
details from real mathematicians involved in the review issue.
The poor sorry and forlorn mathematicians on sci.math should have been
told such "facts" and details to take into account in their judgement
of the alleged review of the Harris Paper by an alleged "closed list".
But the really irksome aspect is that when such representations of
facts and personal knowledge were challenged, Quinn became evasive,
condescending, and insulting.
Here's the simple reason - Quinn was protecting his friend James
Harris, his precious high-IQ society, and/or Quinn's ego with his
divine right to pronounce "facts" as unquestionable.
Truly, with all of this hidden "facts" and the "eccentric" nature of
Beckwith, the whole "closed list" issue illustrates the elitist and
intelllectually dishonest nature of Quinn to selectively make
representations, including spreading rumors and alleged facts not in
his personal knowledge, with Quinn feeling ABSOLUTELY NO NEED to
sup****t or corroborate his representations.
Unethical to violate the "closed list"? If this were true, why is
Quinn being so unethical with everything else, disparaging Beckwith
now, instead of back then, or even disparaging Beckwith at all? So
that Quinn can look good here? Ha!
Quinn could, and in fact has, pulled statements out of his ass and
said they were facts. Only now is the TRUTH being dragged from Quinn.
And that's what DLTruth is all about, right?
Of course, Quinn is dismissive, because he doesn't want a review of
his pitiful and intellectually dishonest behavior.
Whether or not some eccentric named Beckwith came forward does not
absolve Quinn of being intellectually dishonest.
Keep spinning your tales, Quinn. You can't rewrite history -- you can
only surpress it, like Big Brother in 1984.
Quinn, you're an elitist fascist!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"closed list" "closed list" "closed list"
"personal space" "personal space" "personal space"
Hey Quinn, I'm laughing at the "superior intellect"
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
|
