Very unsatisfied with treatment of Andy Zwierzyna claim

[Tosefos]

Firstly, im not one of the deluded crew or paranormalists and am passionately scientific, and through lots of study into evolution, neuropschology and physics/chemistry as well as human history i feel able to personally conclusively close the case on paranormal claims. I know the more psychotic great apes will forever need to beleive in these mental creations and that they will evolve over time(the claims) probably out of recognition the further the light of science encroaches on their required darkness. I feel never will every single abstract notion be able to to be debunked and like a mythical creature when u cut off its head several will grow in its place, the human mind isnt predisposed to being able to understand the world rationally, althoough it can be done with the help of science. I beleive that science has made us understand our origins and what makes us and the universe tick and showed exactly why we often delude ourselves and exactly why and when these delusions came into existence and how they arent really rooted in reality.
Sorry for that unplanned paragraph, but i have just read the Andy Zwierzyna archived claim, now this claim seemed testable, maybe the dark room, one observer couldnt be tenored but im sure a compromise could be reached, more observers or maybe one and a video & audio recorder? But basically this gentleman gave a testable operational criterion for investigation(the give me a couple of go`s at it aside) which would have been another blow for the hogwash types when it was debunked. We know that in the cold light always will science humiliate the liars and those who havent left the medieval age.
The best these people can get is the situation created, namely that it looks like they were on the verge of finally proving what theyve`known` for thousands of years on our home turf, but we, CIA style had to hurriedly cover it up and run and hide lest we admit they were right after all.
I cant see why this couldnt be wrangled out into a functional experimental design, and it hurts me that the $1M prize and its steely proof that paranormal BS can never get the slightest foothold in scientific fact should be running and hiding.
Especially with the(i know, but i felt compelled to write this) note that Mr Randi personally gave that this shouldnt be discussed further. It brought up images of mediaevil peasant types superstitously refusing to speak certain peoples name. What doesnt he want us to know?
Dont see this as rebellious or confrontational, for ther $1M to carry the weight it claims to surely it cant ignore serious and operationisable claims from `rational` people?

Terrible form.

[jmercer]

Originally posted by Tosefos
Sorry for that unplanned paragraph, but i have just read the Andy Zwierzyna archived claim, now this claim seemed testable, maybe the dark room, one observer couldnt be tenored but im sure a compromise could be reached, more observers or maybe one and a video & audio recorder?

I agree that the claim seems testable, but it doesn't seem like A.Z. wants to compromise on the observers. At least, not to me.

I just re-read the claim... A.Z. initially stated that he didn't want anyone in the room and wanted a dark room. He later compromised and said he would allow himself to be blindfolded rather than have the room dark.

Subsequent correspondence (unless there are emails missing) from JREF about the "no observers" requirement were ignored by A.Z. (Basically, he started to rant about Kramer and claimed he'd had private correspondence with Randi, etc.)

If JREF wants observers in the room to preclude cheating, that's hardly an unreasonable requirement - and if Andy Zwierzyna agreed to it, then (from what I can see), JREF would probably proceed.

What's wrong with that?

[jmercer]

Oh - and welcome to the forums. :)

[Tosefos]

If i recall he said 1 obsever in the room and wearing a blindfold would be okay. I dont see why more observers would neccesarily help stop cheating, just one reliable witness to testify he doesnt cheat, and (maybe as im not magician) i dont see how he could cheat anyway.

The way i imagine it. He is lead into a sealed room, except for corridors leading to room it would be the only room he enters. In another room totally sealed off from from the room occupied by the alleged `paranormalist`, a referee places the random cards in the envelopes. The call is made or messenger sent to say the envelopes are in place and then the `guess work` begins.
He doesnt get any money, and the $1m challenege shows its no coward.

The building would be a `randi` building, obviously not the `psychics` house

[jmercer]

Well, after re-reading the claim thread again to consider your most recent post, I see that Randi has requested that this particular claim not be discussed further in the forum.

If I'd caught that before, I wouldn't have responded to your post initially. My apologies to JREF for not considering their wishes in the matter.

Signing off...

[Tosefos]

i have the highest respect for mr Randi and the staff here, but as a rejecter of paranormalism and with no respect for their system of not asking serious questions that keeps them deluded i find it impossibly difficult to allow myself to do the same with information i perceive to be potentially very questionable. I dont think we should be able to claim a critical midset if we find ourselves only thinking and discussing what Mr Randi says we can.
Please tell me if im wrong

[Prolix]

Tosefos said,

I cant see why this couldnt be wrangled out into a functional experimental design

I'd guess you're right. Since there is nothing on the part of Randi or JREF or the forum prohibiting this, why don't and Andy organize and conduct the test?

Then it would be impossible for Randi to, " ...hurriedly cover it up and run and hide."

And you and Andy would actually have control of what the press and scientific community saw, and we would all be liberated from that evil guy Randi's influence.

Tesofos, you may be a good one to answer this. Why is it that when Randi refuses to test, the pseudo-sceptics and paranormalists react as if they've received an edict from God preventing any and all testing by anyone else?

[Beady]

Originally posted by Tosefos
I dont think we should be able to claim a critical midset if we find ourselves only thinking and discussing what Mr Randi says we can.
Please tell me if im wrong

You're wrong.

First, this is not a public forum, it is a private forum, owned and operated by JREF. It is private property, and we are all here on sufferance. Claiming to have a critical mindset does not release anyone from the rules of hospitality, and mere good manners require that you accomodate the host's wishes while under his roof.

Second, Randi only requested that discussion be closed in response to the applicant's complaints that the correspondence had been made public without his knowledge or consent. Had it not been for that complaint, Randi presumably would not have made the request.

Shermer, in "The Science of Good and Evil," has written to the effect that the easiest way to convince someone that you are a decent person, is to be a decent person. Similarly, the easiest way to convince people that you are a true skeptic is to behave like a true skeptic. Whatever else a true skeptic does, he does not make unsubstantiated accusations, he does not assign motives, and he does not twist other people's words to suit his purposes. You have done all of these things. Despite your self-proclaimed status as an iconoclast and fearless seeker of the truth, you are behaving more like an ignorant, zealous, mannerless boor. Keep it up, and you will have people convinced.

And before you assign motives to me and twist my words, I'm on record more than once as disagreeing with and criticizing both Randi and Kramer, and never once has sanctioning ever been threatened. As far as possible, to the best of my personal recollection, completely free speech has always been allowed here.

And now, like jmercer, I am leaving this thread. If you wish to take issue with what I've said, start another thread, probably on the Community forum, entitled something like "Randi and Free Speech," or whatever.

[NiallM]

Originally posted by Beady
You're wrong.

First, this is not a public forum, it is a private forum, owned and operated by JREF. It is private property, and we are all here on sufferance. Claiming to have a critical mindset does not release anyone from the rules of hospitality, and mere good manners require that you accomodate the host's wishes while under his roof.

Second, Randi only requested that discussion be closed in response to the applicant's complaints that the correspondence had been made public without his knowledge or consent. Had it not been for that complaint, Randi presumably would not have made the request.

Shermer, in "The Science of Good and Evil," has written to the effect that the easiest way to convince someone that you are a decent person, is to be a decent person. Similarly, the easiest way to convince people that you are a true skeptic is to behave like a true skeptic. Whatever else a true skeptic does, he does not make unsubstantiated accusations, he does not assign motives, and he does not twist other people's words to suit his purposes. You have done all of these things. Despite your self-proclaimed status as an iconoclast and fearless seeker of the truth, you are behaving more like an ignorant, zealous, mannerless boor. Keep it up, and you will have people convinced.

And before you assign motives to me and twist my words, I'm on record more than once as disagreeing with and criticizing both Randi and Kramer, and never once has sanctioning ever been threatened. As far as possible, to the best of my personal recollection, completely free speech has always been allowed here.

And now, like jmercer, I am leaving this thread. If you wish to take issue with what I've said, start another thread, probably on the Community forum, entitled something like "Randi and Free Speech," or whatever.

It *is* a public forum, in as much as it is easily accessed by the public and cases can be read by anyone who finds the place.

I'm very disturbed, as a long-term fan of Randi - at the thought that discussion of a single topic could be frowned upon. I note, however, that the thread hasn't been closed, which may mean that the topic could still be discussed.

I'm concerned, however, because such a suggestion can lead to many types of charge that could be levelled at the JREF, including censorship.

I get the impression that Randi can be irascible and curmudgeonly to the point of being obnoxious. It's an impression that I've gleaned from reading this site for the past few years. It appears that his attitude has permeated throughout many of the JREF's contacts with people.

I'm getting the strong impression that this is standard MO for JREF and I don't think that it serves their admirable purposes well.

[Hastur]

Niall, you haven't seen the level of despicable behavior from the credulous side of the fence Randi has seen. Neither have I, and I have seen a span of despicability from fundamentalist Christians, to creationists, to racists, to anti-Masons, to Trekkies, to a certain person over at Hyperspace magazine who I will not mention here, to cops, to the Republican party. Exposure to this gives a lot of insight into when someone is pulling the wool over one's eyes; it also causes one to not suffer fools lightly.
I'm getting tired of people on this board complaining about Randi or Kramer's demeanor to applicants who become belligerent or try to bend the rules in their favor. There's a name for it: Style Over Substance Fallacy. Argue the point, not the way it is phrased. Could they be more polite? Possibly. Would it get them anywhere? Doubt it. Is it the kick in the pants some of applicants possibly deserve (e.g. You Know Who) and probably need (e.g. the 22 year old who sees ghosts in the dust of a dim room)? You betcha.

[NiallM]

Originally posted by Hastur
Niall, you haven't seen the level of despicable behavior from the credulous side of the fence Randi has seen. Neither have I, and I have seen a span of despicability from fundamentalist Christians, to creationists, to racists, to anti-Masons, to Trekkies, to a certain person over at Hyperspace magazine who I will not mention here, to cops, to the Republican party. Exposure to this gives a lot of insight into when someone is pulling the wool over one's eyes; it also causes one to not suffer fools lightly.
I'm getting tired of people on this board complaining about Randi or Kramer's demeanor to applicants who become belligerent or try to bend the rules in their favor. There's a name for it: Style Over Substance Fallacy. Argue the point, not the way it is phrased. Could they be more polite? Possibly. Would it get them anywhere? Doubt it. Is it the kick in the pants some of applicants possibly deserve (e.g. You Know Who) and probably need (e.g. the 22 year old who sees ghosts in the dust of a dim room)? You betcha.
I've seen far more despicable behaviour than you can imagine. I went to a christian brother school. I spent my formative years in the hands of woo-woos. Being beaten by them. Under the constant threat of abuse by them.

So please don't presume to tell me about what people will do when driven by ideals.

My point is not about how the woo-woos will feel. I care for some of them; thse that have not been given a sufficient education; those that don't realise that they are wrong in their belifs about their "powers"; those that don't have the critical faculties to know what constitutes a valis test. Maybe these are in the minority; maybe 99% of the people who approach the JREF are fraudsters and know they are.

I'm not concerned about them. I'm concerned about the small amount of people that honestly think that they have special powers; I'm concerne about their followers, who look at what happens to them when they approach the JREF. The JREF's attitude gives them additional ammunition - ammunition that the woo-woos will seize on and use as long as they can, while yet another (sometimes genuine [in their own eyes]) applicant licks their wounds in the corner.

Believe me, I'm not against the JREF - I really believe that it fulfills an essential role in our society - a role that seems to have been abrogated by our educational systems.

I feel, however, that Randi's own personal demeanour and experiences ave infiltrated through JREF to the extent that most of their communications appear to me to be prediacted on an aggressive premise. If nothing else, it is simply bad PR - and bad PR that has been used against JREF again and again.

It behoves the JREF to bite its lip often and to be far more politic in its dealings with the woo-woos. Hell, JREF needs to be doubly, if not triply, more professional than some the other educational establishments around.

I fully accept that there must be some dreadful people approaching the JREF; that's the nature of a million dollar challenge. It acts as a candle to the millions of moths who think that they can melt ice, predict lottery numbers, etc etc.

But, hey, I know nothing. The JREF should behave exactly as its esteemed (I'm not being sarcastic) founder decides. My suggestion is merely that JREF would enhance its credibility by offering a more rigorously professional face to the world.

In an organisation as august as JREF petty tantrums and rudeness are an aberration. Or they should be.

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally posted by NiallM




I'm not concerned about them. I'm concerned about the small amount of people that honestly think that they have special powers..

Why are you concerned about them? All they have to do is agree to a testing procedure, and demonstrate their special powers.. It's as simple as that.


But, hey, I know nothing. The JREF should behave exactly as its esteemed (I'm not being sarcastic) founder decides. My suggestion is merely that JREF would enhance its credibility by offering a more rigorously professional face to the world.

Why does JREF ( in your opinion ) need to enhance it's credibility?

It offers a challenge. Many have applied. No one has passed a preliminary test ..


In an organisation as august as JREF petty tantrums and rudeness are an aberration. Or they should be. I agree with you. However, there is no reason why this should stand in the way of someone with a genuine paranormal ability, to apply for the challenge and win it.

It is, on the other hand a convenient ( if irrelevant ) excuse, that is used quite often...

" Ooooooh! They were rude to me! I don't need their stinking million!"

[NiallM]

You've posted my reply selectively and out of context

JREF has an equal responsibility to the woo-woos who are midguided as they do to to the people who are misled by them.

Come on... there are victims all over the place, and the sort of people who have been brought up to believe that they have special powers (and who don't have enough smarts to know better) are victims (probably much bigger victims) than those who pass over a few hundred dollars for a "reading" which is total crap.

The misguided are deserving of our sympathy, and are doubly deserving of being treated with courtesy and respect.

The snake-oil merhcants are deserving of contempt, but there's a danger that if your treat everyone as a fraud, you will ofend people who are genuine in their self-delusion. In he meantime, the real frauds will exploit the JREF's rude attitude to its fullest.

I *know* that Randi and others have their patience strained to the hilt.

It behoves them to let it ne stretched as far as possible; that is, quite simply, the nature of their admirable crusade.

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally posted by NiallM
You've posted my reply selectively and out of context

Yes. That is called " addressing your points, I wished to address "..




I *know* that Randi and others have their patience strained to the hilt.

It behoves them to let it ne stretched as far as possible; that is, quite simply, the nature of their admirable crusade. You keep saying this in one way or another, and you have presented no evidence to support a claim " that it behoves " the JREF, to treat all woo-woos patiently.

I do not see that it is the nature of their crusade at all.. I certainly do not believe that the woos are a source of revenue for the JREF, or that treating them patiently will advance their cause at all.

[Redcard]

As a mentalist/magician, I can assure you that under the conditions he listed, I could most likely pass his test. Especially if I was allowed 2 chances through to correct my mistakes.

[NiallM]

Originally posted by Diogenes
You keep saying this in one way or another, and you have presented no evidence to support a claim " that it behoves " the JREF, to treat all woo-woos patiently.

I do not see that it is the nature of their crusade at all.. I certainly do not believe that the woos are a source of revenue for the JREF, or that treating them patiently will advance their cause at all.
I t behoves JREF to be xtraordinarily courteous for several reasons:

* It portrays a professional front and accords with best standards required of professional organisations.
* It demonstrates tat JREF is above the fray and will not lower their standards no matter what happens.
* It is the most simple human courtesy.
* Because rudeness harens peoples' attitudes (in particular the woo-woos). Rudeness provides them with a meand to redirect attention from their claim.

I worked in customer service for a few years in our domestic electricity company. Guess what? The imbalanced and delusion use electricity. They're also inveterate complainers. I spent nearly two years patiently handling their sometimes rabid mails. Had I ever been the smallest bit rude or dismissive I would have been fired on the spot.

I know that some people strain the patience to the limit. I know that some of them have deeply ofensive agendas (the Zyklon B man, anybody?), the breatharian guy (no more than a criminal in my book), and others.

I find many of these people below contempt.

I would still deal with them politely but firmly no matter how excitable they got.

It would be immensely to JREF's good.

[edthedoc]

It also "behoves" the woo-woos to be polite, get the point and stop wasting everyone's time, but no, they quite happily doge, duck, whinge, complain, confuse and otherwise do their best to avoid being tested.

If I genuinely bend spoons with my mind or read people's minds agreeing a test protocol with Randi would be the easiest thing in the world.

[NiallM]

Originally posted by edthedoc
It also "behoves" the woo-woos to be polite, get the point and stop wasting everyone's time, but no, they quite happily doge, duck, whinge, complain, confuse and otherwise do their best to avoid being tested.

If I genuinely bend spoons with my mind or read people's minds agreeing a test protocol with Randi would be the easiest thing in the world.
I'm not sure why you have quotes around "behoves" - it's a prefectly appropriate word to use.

Anyway, the behaviour of the woo-woos is their own affair. I agree: they bitch and whine, duck and dive, and generally make themselves a pain in the butt. That's the nature of things: when they're cornered, they'll flap about in an effort to draw attention away from their failures.

It doesn't mean that JREF must behave the same, though, does it?

[Hastur]

I'm not sure why you have quotes around "behoves" - it's a prefectly appropriate word to use.

Maybe because it is spelled "behooves."

[Tunny]

I'm not sure why you have quotes around "behoves" - it's a prefectly appropriate word to use.
Maybe because it is spelled "behooves."

Only if you insist on spelling it prefectly.

Tunny
Pedantry R Us

[Hastur]

Only if you insist on spelling it prefectly.

Or you want to make a subtle hint about spelling without being offensive about it. :p

[tamiO]

Originally posted by NiallM
You've posted my reply selectively and out of context

JREF has an equal responsibility to the woo-woos who are midguided as they do to to the people who are misled by them.

Come on... there are victims all over the place, and the sort of people who have been brought up to believe that they have special powers (and who don't have enough smarts to know better) are victims (probably much bigger victims) than those who pass over a few hundred dollars for a "reading" which is total crap.

The misguided are deserving of our sympathy, and are doubly deserving of being treated with courtesy and respect.

The snake-oil merhcants are deserving of contempt, but there's a danger that if your treat everyone as a fraud, you will ofend people who are genuine in their self-delusion. In he meantime, the real frauds will exploit the JREF's rude attitude to its fullest.

I *know* that Randi and others have their patience strained to the hilt.

It behoves them to let it ne stretched as far as possible; that is, quite simply, the nature of their admirable crusade.

Fabulous post. You aren't alone in thinking this.

[charley_bigtime]

Originally posted by Beady As far as possible, to the best of my personal recollection, completely free speech has always been allowed here.

[/B]

You've got to be fuggin kidding...:dl:

[KRAMER]

Originally posted by Tosefos
Especially with the(i know, but i felt compelled to write this) note that Mr Randi personally gave that this shouldnt be discussed further. It brought up images of mediaevil peasant types superstitously refusing to speak certain peoples name. What doesnt he want us to know?

There's no big mystery to any of this. There is, however, a very simple explanation.

The note by Randi was submitted at the request of Andy himself, who tossed quite a few cookies when it came to his attention that both his claim and his correspondence with us had been posted in the JREF forum. He went pretty crazy on us, lots of threats, etc, and demanded that both his claim and all of his correspondence be removed from the forum immediately. Randi simply complied, as Andy's state of mind seemed to grow increasingly aggravated with each email.

None of this is worth anyone getting hurt over, and we were all concerned (based upon the tone of his threats) that Andy just might be/become dangerous.

Andy also demanded rather emphatically that he no longer be discussed in the forum. We thought we could perhaps make the potential problems go away by complying with his request.

It's nothing more than a request. Discuss it as much and as often as you please, but be aware that Andy may get very upset about it. Neither Randi nor myself will comment further on this matter.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by edthedoc
It also "behoves" the woo-woos to be polite, get the point and stop wasting everyone's time, but no, they quite happily doge, duck, whinge, complain, confuse and otherwise do their best to avoid being tested.

If I genuinely bend spoons with my mind or read people's minds agreeing a test protocol with Randi would be the easiest thing in the world.

You are so correct, and you are so correct.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by KRAMER
There's no big mystery to any of this. There is, however, a very simple explanation.

You know perfectly well that no woo wants a "very simple explanation". ;)

Originally posted by KRAMER
The note by Randi was submitted at the request of Andy himself, who tossed quite a few cookies when it came to his attention that both his claim and his correspondence with us had been posted in the JREF forum. He went pretty crazy on us, lots of threats, etc, and demanded that both his claim and all of his correspondence be removed from the forum immediately. Randi simply complied, as Andy's state of mind seemed to grow increasingly aggravated with each email.

One might ask oneself: Why would Andy be so concerned about publicity, given the fact that it is clearly stated in the Terms that:

3. Applicant agrees that all data (photographic, recorded, written, etc.) gathered as a result of the testing may be used freely by the JREF.
Source (http://www.randi.org/research/challenge.html)

If Andy really had a claim, it would have to become public, whether he would pass or not. So, by demanding that his claim be kept secret, he is also saying that he never intended to be tested.

Originally posted by KRAMER
None of this is worth anyone getting hurt over, and we were all concerned (based upon the tone of his threats) that Andy just might be/become dangerous.

In my experience, one very effective way of dealing with threats is to publish them. That usually sends the urchins scurrying away...

Originally posted by KRAMER
Andy also demanded rather emphatically that he no longer be discussed in the forum. We thought we could perhaps make the potential problems go away by complying with his request.

It's nothing more than a request. Discuss it as much and as often as you please, but be aware that Andy may get very upset about it. Neither Randi nor myself will comment further on this matter.

Oh, Andy may get "very upset" if we talk about him, eh?

So....(clapping hands together in an appreciating manner)...what should we talk about? ;)

[NiallM]

Let's talk about spelling!

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=behove

Behove and behoove are both valid spellings!

[Metullus]

How about "behoofs"? :)

[tamiO]

Originally posted by KRAMER
There's no big mystery to any of this. There is, however, a very simple explanation.

The note by Randi was submitted at the request of Andy himself, who tossed quite a few cookies when it came to his attention that both his claim and his correspondence with us had been posted in the JREF forum. He went pretty crazy on us, lots of threats, etc, and demanded that both his claim and all of his correspondence be removed from the forum immediately. Randi simply complied, as Andy's state of mind seemed to grow increasingly aggravated with each email.

None of this is worth anyone getting hurt over, and we were all concerned (based upon the tone of his threats) that Andy just might be/become dangerous.

Andy also demanded rather emphatically that he no longer be discussed in the forum. We thought we could perhaps make the potential problems go away by complying with his request.

It's nothing more than a request. Discuss it as much and as often as you please, but be aware that Andy may get very upset about it. Neither Randi nor myself will comment further on this matter.

Now that you have offered up that the reason for the request was that you were and still are concerned for this man's mental health, will you discontinue your sadistic treatment of applicants? Or will you continue to publish emails the of applicants and proceed to publicly antagonise, humiliate and invite others to join in the ridicule.

I hope that you would consider the possible fragility of each and every applicant and take that responsibility seriously now.

I think the JREF should consider deleting the sub forum, "Challenge Applications." It appears to do more harm than good.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by tamiO
Now that you have offered up that the reason for the request was that you were and still are concerned for this man's mental health, will you discontinue your sadistic treatment of applicants? Or will you continue to publish emails the of applicants and proceed to publicly antagonise, humiliate and invite others to join in the ridicule.

I hope that you would consider the possible fragility of each and every applicant and take that responsibility seriously now.

I think the JREF should consider deleting the sub forum, "Challenge Applications." It appears to do more harm than good.

Could you explain why anyone should care about what you say?

[KRAMER]

About an hour after my previous post on this thread about Andy, I received 105 emails from an "AZ" return address that stated simply, "You're a faggot Kramer".

I wonder who sent them.

Not being psychic, however, I really wouldn't know.

[NiallM]

Originally posted by CFLarsen
Could you explain why anyone should care about what you say?
???

I thought the post (by Ttami0) made some very valid points.

I am convinced that there are many people out there who genuinely entertain the thought that they have paranormal powers.

Quite a lot of these may be in quite a fragile mental state. Many severe psychological disorders will have symptoms which can appearr to the sufferer to be evidence of psychic activity. Who knows? If I were dealing with an undiagnosed psychosis which was characterised by visions etc etc, I may prefer to feel that I have psychic abilities than to address the possibility that I'm severely ill.

In that case, some gentle handling would be most definitely in order.

[Metullus]

Originally posted by KRAMER
About an hour after my previous post on this thread about Andy, I received 105 emails from an "AZ" return address that stated simply, "You're a faggot Kramer".

I wonder who sent them.

Not being psychic, however, I really wouldn't know.

I suspect that they are intended to be deragatory. Probably something you said.

Can't be sure, though.

[Aoidoi]

Suprisingly good grammer for such a sentiment. "You're" and "your" seem to be interchangeable for most people.

Always nice when someone uses proper English to express juvenile insults.

Perhaps he was just commenting on you being stuffed with tobacco, wrapped in white paper, and flammable. So difficult to get your epithets properly interpreted in the global community.

[jmercer]

Hm. And here I thought that he was calling him a piece of firewood... ;)

[Metullus]

Originally posted by jmercer
Hm. And here I thought that he was calling him a piece of firewood... ;)

Does that mean he thinks that KRAMER is hot stuff?