Dory, i'd like to bring up...

[Cal]

Quote:

I don't think we need any more words at this point. Is it thumbs up or thumbs down?

Well, I vote thumbs down for the troll. I'm tired of the passive-agressive behaviour. Everyone knows the cr@ppy tool and book he's hawking - mostly because he keeps posting the same cr@p over and over again.

OK - here's a poll for the group:
1. Do you think *****=pocus is a troll?
2. Should he be banned?

1. Hell YES!
2. Hell YES! * -- Last time this came up, I thought we should just ignore him and not actually ban any one. He just lays low and then starts his sh!t up again.

It is obvious all the crap he posts is an attempt to drum up support for his magic tool and the tome he's writing. He adds nothing of value to the conversations and his repetitive posts are annoying and disrupting.

SILENCE THE TROLL! *

As an alternative, we could escape to the Raddr's pages where the troll isn't allowed. It's really pleasant to read thru those posts and not have to deal with the "magic tool" issue and all the other ***** cr@p.

[hocus]

There is no need to "silence" anyone, Cal. I do not push my SWR views on anyone. Rarely do I put forward a thread-starter on the SWR question.

When other posters put up false or misleading information, I often feel an obligation to respond to it. I am the community's "voice" in favor of the data-based methodlogy. Do you not think it is right that I respond to false or misleading comments in an appropriate way?

[Cal]

Quote:

I am the community's "voice" in favor of the data-based methodlogy.

Your delusions are pretty frightening. I don't recall anyone appointing you as spokesman for the "community" in regard to any issue. In fact, I'm sure the community doesn't want you to speak for them. I'm sure you can count your supporters on one hand. While many people are interested in different ideas, we've all heard yours over and over again and they've been soundly debunked. You don't add value to conversations - well, I'm sure in your delusional world, you are indispensable, but I'm sure we'd all muddle along nicely without you.

[hocus]

they've been soundly debunked.

If my claim that the REHP study is gravely flawed is delusional, why is it that William Bernstein says that conventional methodology studies generate "highly misleading" results? When you have someone like Bernstein on your side, you are not delusional.

You've allowed yourself to become emotional re all this, Cal. Discussion boards are places where people present a diversity of viewpoints on the questions examined. There are lots and lots of good reasons for aspiring early retirees to have doubts re intercst's SWR claims. People need to be able to explore their doubts in reasoned back-and-forth discussions.

It is not a problem that we disagree on what the historical data says re SWRs. The only problem is the intensely emotional reaction we have seen on the part of REHP study enthusiasts to my claim that the REHP study's methodology is analytically invalid for purposes of determining SWRs.

[BigMoneyJim]

I'm getting tired of *****' posts. And I take offense at his calling people stupid or mistaken for not agreeing with him. I take offense that he speaks of his plan as "superior", more "valid" and "true" and continues with the assumption that other points of view are deluded or corrupted. After 3 years of this stuff being repeated I've had enough of it. I wouldn't mind seeing ***** banned.

[hocus]

It is not reasonable to insist that someone post dishonestly, BigMoneyJim. What I say about SWRs is what I have found in the data. There are a number of well-regarded experts in the field who have found similar things. My views are sincerely held views and my views are reasonable views.

The tone of the SWR discussions hurts the board. I am open to any realistic proposal for improving the tone. I don't push this on anyone. I don't think that would be right, given the circumstances. But it is not reasonable to expect that posters who put up misleading statements re my work or JWR1945's work or Bernstein's work can be permitted to do so unchallenged.

If the intercst supporters want to just let it rest, I am A-OK with that. When an intercst supporter puts forward a misleading claim re my views, I am put in a position where I have no reasonable choice but to respond. I always aim to respond in the way that does the least damage to the board given what needs to be said. I can't post dishonestly, however. I know for certain that that is not the right answer here.

[arrete]

I am so tired of this coprolitia. He is out to destroy this board like he has others. As I said - it gives him some kind of thrill.

arrete - my one post for tonight. But it needs to be said.

[Nords]

Quote:

... coprolitia.

Whoa-- my new favorite word!

Quote:

He is out to destroy this board like he has others. As I said - it gives him some kind of thrill.

Dory, while I understand the concept of handing out enough rope for self-execution, I think there's more than enough precedent to have him take it elsewhere.