Abd seemed reasonable and respectable.
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:12 PM, Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com>wrote: > I support him back. He is a a man of peace and understanding abd was > defending the religion of his and his friends. > > > 2013/5/30 Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com> > >> Dear Bill, >> Please bring Abd back! He knows a lot LENR >> and his unique error was answering to a nasty >> troll. >> Peter >> >> >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:14 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint >> <zeropo...@charter.net>wrote: >> >>> I agree with DaveR… **** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Andrew and Duncan had only been actively contributing (and yes, mostly >>> useful) for a week or two and the insults and snide remarks had already >>> started... not one, but several. That is not disputable…**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> BOTH parties could be right, and the difference is in a misunderstanding >>> of what the other party was proposing. Dave based his position on what he >>> knows to be sound engineering principles and built a Spice model which >>> verifies his understanding. He asked them to do the same. They leveled >>> more insults and did not produce a model to support their position. Both >>> are EEs and should have been able to build a Spice model in minutes. I >>> still think that one was talking apples and the other oranges, and the >>> comparison of models would have revealed the differences and settled the >>> matter. They chose to be arrogant and disrespectful; Dave maintained a >>> respectful tone the entire time… easy, and correct decision by Bill.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> I too would welcome them back provided they build the spice model, then >>> they exchange models and report back as to either an error in the model, or >>> that there are differences in the models which would explain why the >>> disagreement.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> -Mark Iverson**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> *From:* David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] >>> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 29, 2013 2:52 PM >>> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com >>> >>> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:MODERATOR: andrewppp removed**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Jed, I vote to keep him off for a while. Perhaps you missed his insults >>> toward me and others on the list.**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> What I find particularly funny is that he did not even realize that what >>> I stated was true! If he eventually makes that spice model that I begged >>> him and his friend Duncan to do, he might want to apologize. I built a >>> model in less than 15 minutes that showed my position was completely valid. >>> **** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> A cooling off period might change his attitude. How about a condition >>> attached to his return:Build and test that spice model.**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> Dave**** >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> >>> To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> >>> Sent: Wed, May 29, 2013 4:04 pm >>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:MODERATOR: andrewppp removed**** >>> >>> William Beaty <bi...@eskimo.com> wrote:**** >>> >>> **** >>> >>> multiple violations of rule 2. >>> >>> (I suspect that he didn't read the rules before subscribing.)**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> Whoa! That seems precipitous. He did not seem so bad to me.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> >>> Rule 2. NO SNEERING. Ridicule, derision, scoffing, and ad-hominem is >>> banned. Debunking or "Pathological Skepticism" is banned (see the link.) >>> The tone here should be one of legitimate disagreement and respectful >>> debate. . . . >>> >>> http://www.amasci.com/weird/wvort.html#rules >>> >>> >>> Perhaps you can invite him back after a bit? Also maybe Abd? I miss him. >>> **** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> They might not swallow their pride and return. Maybe you should say "I >>> acted too hastily, I apologize." Say this whether you mean it or not. >>> That's how they do things in Japan.**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >>> - Jed**** >>> >>> ** ** >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Dr. Peter Gluck >> Cluj, Romania >> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >> > > > > -- > Daniel Rocha - RJ > danieldi...@gmail.com >
