--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > <snip> > > > > > I think it's good every so often to remember who > > > > > *paid* for his E-ticket ride. Where do you think > > > > > the money came from for his robes and crown, much > > > > > less his weight in gold? From all the TBs who > > > > > donated to projects along the way that they'd > > > > > convinced themselves were really going to happen. > > > > > > > > For the record, the money didn't go to him personally > > > > but to fund his research; essentially, it was the TMO > > > > giving money to the TMO. > > > > > > So he did NOT get his weight in gold. > > > > > > In other words, the whole scale stunt was just a way to > reapportion > > > funds WITHIN the TMO from one department to another... > > > > Funny, I don't recall saying anything about > > reapportioning funds from one department to > > another. You made that up. > > > > > If this is what you are saying then the whole publicity stunt > was, > > > at worst, dishonest in its portrayal, at best, fraudulent. > > > > Oh, please. The TMO would have funded his > > research in any case. They just decided to > > hand out the money in a way that would give > > them some publicity. Nothing the least bit > > fraudulent about it. The press release said > > what the money was to be used for. > > > > And publicity stunts are by definition > > "dishonest." This was a good one, imaginative > > and quite successful. > > > > Let me understand this, Judy. > > You most certainly seem to be saying that the "giving Tony Nader his > weight in gold" was: > > 1) a good publicity stunt; and > > 2) "imaginative"; and > > 3) "quite successful?
I believe if you look above, you won't need to muse about what I "seem to be saying," you can see what I actually said. But in case that's too much trouble, I'll quote it here: "This was a good one, imaginative and quite successful." > I will cede to you that, yes, #2 is correct that it WAS imaginative. > > But I suggest to you and the others readers on this forum that if > you do actually ascribe to both #1 and #3 that you are either: > > 1) deluded; > > 2) quite possibly brainwashed by a cult; or > > 3) in denial. And I suggest to you that you frequently seem to have difficulty interpreting plain English when it's saying something you don't want to accept. A "good" publicity stunt is a successful one. A "successful" publicity stunt is one that gets-- wait for it!--a lot of publicity. This stunt got a lot of publicity. You concede it was imaginative. Therefore, it was a good publicity stunt, imaginative and quite successful. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
