You continue to accuse without end. You might think about what you are so fast to dish out. That you tell me to 'beware' of what I think is an insult to yourself. That you assume what I do and don't 'believe' in the NY Times or anywhere else without knowing what my standards are or how much I know about journalism … oh, my. You've got a fast and furious mind, Mike.
You continue to accuse without end. You might think about what you are so fast to dish out. That you tell me to 'beware' of what I think is an insult to yourself. That you assume what I do and don't 'believe' in the NY Times or anywhere else without knowing what my standards are or how much I know about journalism … oh, my. You've got a fast and furious mind, Mike.
When and if I have time, I will expand upon my criticisms of your comments more fully. Your rational for throwing around accusations is that anything is corruptible. Do you wish to elaborate on why I thought that the DA case may not have been open and shut? Do you wish to make a case that I believe in what ever I read in the NY Times? How familiar are you with journalistic standards? As all human beings are fallible, do you think that journalists can be believable? Could you be wrong about anything? Are any of your accusations right or wrong? As you are human how good could your accusations be?
Fern, I, unfortunately, have a long experience with publication in scientific and engineering journals which have, typically, high standards for providing authentic information.
But, this board is not "The Journal For Electronic Engineering" nor is this board the NY Times.
This board is a place were we, anytime we want, can publish our perspective.
And that is what makes this board fantastic.
I understand that you would like to see the board with more policing and have decided to provide that role.
But, this board requires no reviews for submission like Journals and some Newspapers.
So, I don't get all worked up about having all my references in place.
I just post my perspective based on my thinking.
I will continue to do that, and, I hope you continue policing.
Mike, It is unfortunate that we are facing one another with an air of unpleasantness. You continue to falsely accuse me. I questioned the factual basis of your accusations against Bragg and the NY Times. You return not with answers as I understood them, but with more accusations against me. First, you tell me to 'beware' of believing what I read in the NY Times as if you know how I judge what I read, instead you generalize about my opinion of articles in the paper. Now, your are accusing me of wishing to police the forum. Are you unfamiliar with differences of opinion? Is differing with you about the basis of your attacks wanting to police the forum? Now, you think that I'm 'all worked up" and claim it is about your 'references', which it is not. You end with, 'I hope you continue policing'. Really, Mike? I have listened to you and responded as best I can.
You continue to accuse without end. You might think about what you are so fast to dish out. That you tell me to 'beware' of what I think is an insult to yourself. That you assume what I do and don't 'believe' in the NY Times or anywhere else without knowing what my standards are or how much I know about journalism … oh, my. You've got a fast and furious mind, Mike.
Fern,
Naw, nothing fast and furious here I am sad to say. Would that my mind was just so though.
I am afraid, Fern, that I just don't have anything I hold as incorruptible. Least of which would be any news source of any type.
Humans put all that together Fern. The NY Times failed to interview the two lawyers who quit.
As soon as you know that, then, you know they got a one sided version of what happened.
The NYT did interview the two lawyers who resigned. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/23/nyregion/trump-ny-fraud-investigation.html
When and if I have time, I will expand upon my criticisms of your comments more fully. Your rational for throwing around accusations is that anything is corruptible. Do you wish to elaborate on why I thought that the DA case may not have been open and shut? Do you wish to make a case that I believe in what ever I read in the NY Times? How familiar are you with journalistic standards? As all human beings are fallible, do you think that journalists can be believable? Could you be wrong about anything? Are any of your accusations right or wrong? As you are human how good could your accusations be?
Fern, I, unfortunately, have a long experience with publication in scientific and engineering journals which have, typically, high standards for providing authentic information.
But, this board is not "The Journal For Electronic Engineering" nor is this board the NY Times.
This board is a place were we, anytime we want, can publish our perspective.
And that is what makes this board fantastic.
I understand that you would like to see the board with more policing and have decided to provide that role.
But, this board requires no reviews for submission like Journals and some Newspapers.
So, I don't get all worked up about having all my references in place.
I just post my perspective based on my thinking.
I will continue to do that, and, I hope you continue policing.
Mike, It is unfortunate that we are facing one another with an air of unpleasantness. You continue to falsely accuse me. I questioned the factual basis of your accusations against Bragg and the NY Times. You return not with answers as I understood them, but with more accusations against me. First, you tell me to 'beware' of believing what I read in the NY Times as if you know how I judge what I read, instead you generalize about my opinion of articles in the paper. Now, your are accusing me of wishing to police the forum. Are you unfamiliar with differences of opinion? Is differing with you about the basis of your attacks wanting to police the forum? Now, you think that I'm 'all worked up" and claim it is about your 'references', which it is not. You end with, 'I hope you continue policing'. Really, Mike? I have listened to you and responded as best I can.
Fern, I don't even feel slightly unpleasant toward you.
Don't mistake a very different perspective than your own as unpleasant feelings.
We just have different approaches to posting on this board is all.
IF, the board requires review and references when I have an opinion I will comply.
But, it does not.
PS The lawyers who resigned were interviewed by the NYTimes. Does the truth matter? Does it exist? What about facts?