No, Poly will not hold the deposits, and not for any of the reasons given.
Pseudotriton ruber ruber is a man who posted occasionally here and there in threads I frequented for a while, but did not come to my attention a lot. I was amused by his choice of name, and looked up the link he provided to a picture of a Pseudotriton ruber ruber (the actual salamander, as opposed to the poster).
Then he decided to come to the defense of Badchad, for reasons known best to him. Following which, he’s had this agenda of persuading people that theists are too ignorant to live. (Yes, I am exaggerating. Tough shit; it’s the Pit, and I am entitled to.)
This irritated me, and I did vent a bit about it. But somewhere down the line, I realized I was not being true to my own principles in how I was behaving towards him, and I repented.
In the course of all that, I inquired about how one earns a PhD in Creative Writing, anyway, and he courteously sent me e-mail explaining that. Included was a description of the contents of his, well, project, since “thesis” and “dissertation” are not strictly accurate, .and the school from which he received it. In theory, if I cared to exert myself, I could validate that information with the school, obtain the name of the person who did it, search for schools which have an English faculty member with that name, and validate for myself that he is indeed what he purports to be – and I’m sure he realized that when he provided me the information. Which is sufficient to me to demonstrate that he is most likely as advertised. However, Rubystreak’s statement that I backed her up on his bona fides as a professor is not strictly true, though he did prove to my satisfaction that he has the PhD he claimed – and that he is a professor of English seems a reasonable conclusion from that.
To continue, though, Liberal has proved to me beyond a shadow of a doubt his own bona fides. He has been a guest in my home, and my wife and I in his and Edlyn’s. They have gifted us with friendship and aid at a time when we badly needed both.
For all I know at the moment, PRR and Rubystreak could be sock puppets of a college sophomore giggling into his beer mug at what he’s pulled off. I’m not accusing them of that; I believe them to be who they claim to be. But I have no proof other than what I’ve read on this board and in one e-mail from PRR regarding either and their veracity. Liberal, on the other hand, I know to be a man of integrity who does what he says. And I encourage a third party with a knowledge of contractual law, say Bricker, to examine the offer, the response, the definition of terms, and see who is in the right. Because my view is that there was in fact no meeting of the minds on the terms. Lib asked if he’d consider it, PRR said yes, Lib defined what he would have to do to receive the payment, PRR chose not to meet those terms, and offered others, which Lib declined. And the matter closed with Lib deciding instead to donate to CCF, with those questioning his intent satisfied that that was a plausible outcome.
Now, if anyone decides to tell me that Liberal is dishonest and untrustworthy, and I know different from personal experience, you can guess my opinion of their own veracity.
Lib can take some strong-willed and sometimes outre (from my perspective) positions on issues. But he does it with integrity, as someone who follows through on his convictions. That many of his intellectual positions are not Doper-standard-issue makes him particularly interesting to exchange ideas with, IMO.
And at this point, I am bowing out of this thread. I believe I have done what is called on from me ethically, in full. (Other than spending several hours researching out who said what to whom when with regard to the $500 offer, as requested by PRR, which I’ve summarized my understanding of above. I decline to accept that assignment. If anyone else chooses to do so, more power to them.)
But- he is honest and trustworthy in my book, and I enjoy our debates.