--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > jstein wrote: > > No, the suit was dismissed, as you know. > > > So, Skolnick was sued by the TMO, but the suit was dropped.
It was dismissed. > You said he was never sued by Chopra. Right. > > > Maybe' that's the reason his article was never quoted on Usenet. > > > > > His article was quoted many times on Usenet, as you know. > > > Can you cite an instance where Skolnick's article was quoted on > Usenet? I'd like to read it. So go read the threads. I'm not going to spend time looking up quotes you know are there and are perfectly able to find yourself. > > > According to Skolnick he was sued by the TMO and lost his job. > > > > > Skolnick never claimed to have lost his job because > > of the suit, as you know. Actually, as you know, > > he claims he quit, but, as you know, it wasn't in > > connection with the TMO lawsuit in any case. > > > As you know, I think Skolnick got sued by the TMO. I think he got > fired by JAMA. I think this was all because of his "Hoodwinked" > article. He may have been fired rather than resigned from JAMA, but it had nothing to do with that article, as I've already told you. I explained the circumstances. > And I think this is the reason there are no quotations of > his article on Usenet. Oops, no, you keep making the same false statement. There are MANY quotations from his article on alt.m.t. As you know, it was discussed at great length and dissected and analyzed virtually line by line. I've seen nothing in this dialog that would > lead me to believe otherwise. >
