Earlier I provided six examples of you abusing “Randi fans”. You stated that your doing so was justified because of the way they’d treated you.
Okey, dokey. You asked for it.
A few weeks ago, you came to me in a private message on the Randi boards and asked me (as a lawyer) for information on legal aspects. In particular you had a theory that Randi’s challenge was not legally binding.
I provided probably over a thousand words of information as requested, as best I could. I was utterly polite. I accepted there were aspects of what you were asking about that I didn’t know. I accepted that I was not confident you were wrong: there were aspects I just didn’t know (me being an Australian and not a Floridan lawyer).
I said I didn’t want to and wouldn’t debate you in PM and that if you wanted to take the question further, I suggested you go to GQ where I would endeavour to help you get answers and where there were lawyers who knew Florida law. I suggested that twice. You haven’t taken me up on it.
You never posted any response. Not even a casual “Ta for that Princhester”. Not a word.
A few days later, apropos nothing, you include me in a general broadside as a moron.
A day or so after that, you have the temerity, the ingrateful rudeness to say (of our PM exchange) I “could have been more polite” and (here’s the kicker) that I had “refused to accept any more questions from you”. An utter distortion at best, and an out and out lie at worst, since you knew damn well I’d offered to help in GQ, nay I’d positively urged you to take it to GQ, and all I’d said was that I wouldn’t debate you in PM.
You are a close minded fuckwit with a ego the size of a house but made of eggshell.
This whole Randi thing started when in your very first post on these boards you crashed in and with swaggering confidence announced that Randi was a fraud and sceptics were gullible putzes. Within half a page you’d been forced to admit that the factoids on which you based your opinion were wrong. And poor clever but immature Peter wasn’t used to being wrong were you? You’d lost face, poor darling. Your great big ego which you’d laid on the line with such bravado was cwushed.
Your first reaction was to blame your mistake on other posters. Such a shame that only a few posts before that you’d specifically said that your opinions were based on your own experiences and knowledge and not that of others. And it got even worse when I started a pit thread calling you out for your jerkish behaviour of blaming others for your mistakes.
And ever since then it’s been one attempt after another to find something, anything, with which to support your initial rash slander, because your ego can’t cope with having to face up to the possibilty that you were utterly, irredeemably and publicly wrong.
So you do searches, you post decontextualised questions on other message boards, you start rumours of plagiarism, you troll through Randi’s recorded words like scripture to come up with distorted or out of context quotes that you can find an angle upon that may be wrong, all in some attempt to find something you can pin on Randi. In short you’re roughly the equivalent of a stalker.
You asked me about your theory that Randi’s challenge is legally unenforceable in PM and refused to take it to GQ because firstly you didn’t want to be publically wrong again and secondly you don’t want even more people to poke fun at your obsessive anti-Randi behaviour. Backfired on you now, hasn’t it, jerk?
And before you post some silly remark that this post is typical Princhester, all abuse and no logic or facts, answer the post before this one. Whenever you can.
)