Audio Critic - Page 21

jmercer · 27th April 2005, 07:29 PM

PT - there are actually some people who are fairly knowledgeble about physics on this forum, athough I haven't seen any of them participate in this particular thread.

The problem you are encountering here is simply that you write the longest posts I've ever seen. People who read them and understand them are at a complete loss on how to effectively respond to them, because the bulletin board doesn't lend itself to efficient text quoting and manipulation.

Allow me to suggest that you provide the fundamentals of your views first in a summarized synopsis. Those points that are questioned can then be elaborated upon in a conversational manner, while the ones that are accepted need no further explanation.

Gulliver · 27th April 2005, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Wellfed
You can not be serious. Where is the rest of my text? I'll supply it in my next post along with the subject line as originally presented.

I assure you that I'm perfectly, and professionally, serious. You need to understand that I am concerned only with the text of the email that you sent personally to Kramer. Unless you made it clear within that email that you were just joking around, having idle thoughts, or some other excuse, you made a proposal for a protocol. You accepted it the moment you pressed the "SEND" button. (This is the mailbox rule of contract law.)

If you wish to win any respect from me at this point, your response should include the exact text of the email, along with headers.

Do not tell me what you meant. Do not tell me what you said afterwards. The unadulterated, unembellished email will speak for itself.

This is your last chance as far as I'm concerned. I was skeptical of Kramer's position and yours, but the evidence, so far, points toward you as the wrongful party in these failed negotiations.

Z · 27th April 2005, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Wellfed
Well at least you hate to say it. We could of course say that there is the possibility that everyone here has not been truthful except for Kramer who has already been established as having been untruthful with at least three statements.

This assumption is valid for the sake of your argument, but in reality I was sold on the GSIC before hearing the manufacturers claims.

I personally don't accept the GSIC manufacturers explanation as sensible. I personally think the effect is due to an alteration of the polycarbonate substrate. I have no scientific basis for my belief, it is simply what makes sense to me.

So you're saying, this chip somehow affects a physical alteration in the plastic bottom of the CD? Does it work the same on CD-Rs? For surely you are aware that a CD-R has a spiral-groove polycarb layer, rather than a pitted polycarb layer...

And that's pretty dangerous radiation, that can alter the BOTTOM of a CD from the TOP of the player, through layers of metals and plastics (without refraction or distortion), to PERMANENTLY ALTER your CDs...

Yeah, I can tell you have no scientific basis for your beliefs. But that's OK - you also can't tell confusion for lies, and are at a total loss about cursing.

I know you for what you are. And now everyone can know, as well. Thanks.

Z · 27th April 2005, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gulliver
I assure you that I'm perfectly, and professionally, serious. You need to understand that I am concerned only with the text of the email that you sent personally to Kramer. Unless you made it clear within that email that you were just joking around, having idle thoughts, or some other excuse, you made a proposal for a protocol. You accepted it the moment you pressed the "SEND" button. (This is the mailbox rule of contract law.)

If you wish to win any respect from me at this point, your response should include the exact text of the email, along with headers.

Do not tell me what you meant. Do not tell me what you said afterwards. The unadulterated, unembellished email will speak for itself.

This is your last chance as far as I'm concerned. I was skeptical of Kramer's position and yours, but the evidence, so far, points toward you as the wrongful party in these failed negotiations.

Yeah, just look at the heading, Welf... When you put 'Proposal' on the top of an e-mail, that means you are submitting a proposal - a proposal that they accepted.

So this nonsense you're doing now is waffling about.

Typical, though - disappointing, and typical.

Darat · 27th April 2005, 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Wellfed
Well at least you hate to say it. We could of course say that there is the possibility that everyone here has not been truthful except for Kramer who has already been established as having been untruthful with at least three statements.

...snip..

It has not been established in this thread. When will you post the information that you asked to be asked for?

Skeptical Greg · 28th April 2005, 06:37 AM

PianoTeacher said:

Quote:

As we have established, the GSIC claims to alter the disk physically, and permanently. After that alteration, there are normal expectations that changes in the disk can indeed alter the sound: nothing paranormal.

Note the bold....

There certainly are not any such expectations! ( by anyone who understands how CD audio works )

Since we haven't been reminded of this for a while, here you go..

A CD does not contain sound. It contains data.

Any alteration of that disk, that changes the value of the data, as it is read, would only result in CRC errors and skips if the errors could not be corrected. If the errors can be corrected, then the resulting sound will be indistinguishable from that of an unaltered disk.

Knowing how a CD works is all we need to know, to also know that the device cannot do what the manufacturers claim.

However, if Wellfed ( or anyone ) can indeed distinguish ( beyond chance ) between CD's that have been exposed to the device and those that have not, then he indeed posseses some paranormal ability that we cannot account for, and would certainly be entitled to the prize if he could demonstrate that ability..

Wellfed · 28th April 2005, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gulliver
I assure you that I'm perfectly, and professionally, serious. You need to understand that I am concerned only with the text of the email that you sent personally to Kramer. Unless you made it clear within that email that you were just joking around, having idle thoughts, or some other excuse, you made a proposal for a protocol. You accepted it the moment you pressed the "SEND" button. (This is the mailbox rule of contract law.)

If you wish to win any respect from me at this point, your response should include the exact text of the email, along with headers.

Do not tell me what you meant. Do not tell me what you said afterwards. The unadulterated, unembellished email will speak for itself.

This is your last chance as far as I'm concerned. I was skeptical of Kramer's position and yours, but the evidence, so far, points toward you as the wrongful party in these failed negotiations.

I posted the entire content of my email immediately below my post where I stated that you can't be serious. I used the JREF Forum subject line to display the original subject line contents of the email in question.

Wellfed · 28th April 2005, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by KRAMER
I didn't jump the gun in assuming it was an official protocol submission, and I did NOT copy it from the forum and hand it to Randi.

The Howard Protocol came to me as promised, at the time I was told it would come, via email, which is where all of our official correspondence took place. Only informal discussions take place in the forum. Mr. Anda was anxious to get a response from Randi on it, too. There was absolutely no indication that it was anything other than what Anda told me it was.

Let me put it another way: Anda worked for a good amount of time with one or two forum members on devising the Howard Protocol. Here's my question:

Did any of those who worked on it with him, finished it with him, and were aware that it was being submitted for approval have ANY notion that said submission was anything BUT "official"?

The first time I heard this fairy tail about it not having really been an official protocol was after I told him it had been accepted.

End of story.

I never claimed that you copied it off the Forum. You requested that I copy it off the Forum and send it to you.

I separated Steven's content from my own with a clear division. Everything after this division were my own comments. Here is the content of the email with Steven's protocol edited out for brevity. His protocol was copied and pasted above the division marking in my original correspondence.

----------------end-----------------

This is Mr. Howardâ€™s proposal exactly as he posted it.

I later responded to him with some minor changes I would expect.

If memory serves me, I asked that the 11th disc he mentions be a non GSIC treated reference disc that I could swap in and out to compare with the subject disc at will.

I will review my comments to him on the Forum to see if there is anything I am forgetting

We will need to establish the amount of time necessary to complete this test.

We will need to discuss whether burned copies or original CDâ€™s are to be used. I havenâ€™t established an opinion on the subject myself.

If possible, I think I would prefer that T2 leave the room as I make each identification.

A contingency plan for tube failure will need to be implemented.

I will get back to you via email after Iâ€™ve re-read the Forum discussion about Stevenâ€™s proposal. Steven, and I, had a mild disagreement over a few parameters. I donâ€™t think that my requests altered the integrity of the test. His commentary was to the effect of â€œIf the device makes such a big improvement you shouldnâ€™t need the changesâ€, this element of the discussion went no further.

It is my hope that we are back on track with this process, I sense you are of the same mind.

Wellfed · 28th April 2005, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Darat
It has not been established in this thread. When will you post the information that you asked to be asked for?

I am positive that it has. Take a look at my posts on the upper half of page 20 in this thread. I will get you the promised information within a few days at the latest. I only intend to offer some representative examples, not the totality of the matter.

drkitten · 28th April 2005, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Wellfed
I only intend to offer some representative examples, not the totality of the matter.

I strongly suggest that you reconsider. If you have evidence, present all of it.

Beleth · 28th April 2005, 11:26 AM

And yet another Challenge that started off so promisingly turns into nothing but a he-said-she-said shouting match.

When exactly did brinksmanship become more important than discovering the truth in this matter? Don't tell me it hasn't, because it's plain to everyone that it has.

How utterly useless.

jmercer · 28th April 2005, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Beleth
When exactly did brinksmanship become more important than discovering the truth in this matter? Don't tell me it hasn't, because it's plain to everyone that it has.

How utterly useless.

Beleth, I respect you, and often enjoy your posts. I certainly was impressed by your FAQ... however, please don't lump me in with "everyone", because I don't agree with your assessment. I am of the firm opinion that Mr. Anda made a rash decision in applying for the Challenge here, motivated by the stinging ridicule of his peers at Audio Asylum and Randi's commentary .

Quote:

From Mr. Anda's Application
This device was refered to as a "MAJOR SWINDLE IN OPERATION" and as a "FRAUD" in a recent www.randi.org newsletter. My review of this device at Audio Asylum is also a topic of discussion at the www.randi.org discussion site where I am ridiculed for claiming to hear an effect using the GSIC. The claim to be tested under your Challenge is my ability to detect a difference between a GSIC-treated disc from a non-treated disc through simple listening tests.

I also believe that once he realized he couldn't succeed at the Challenge and vindicate himself, he also realized that he'd placed himself in a position where withdrawal of his claim would mean further (possibly irreparable) public loss of his credibility.

Finally, I believe that all of Mr. Anda's gyrations (documented in the Application thread and summed up in my previous post) were attempts on his part to delay and derail his testing. I believe he did so in the hopes that interest here would subside, or that JREF would close his file in a way that he could absolve himself from failure, if not blame. He succeeded in getting his file closed; he failed in absolving himself, as multiple posters here have indicated.

If there was any brinkmanship involved, it was Mr. Anda's efforts to push Kramer and JREF over the brink of patience so he could escape the consequences of his rash and public committment.

This is how I see it, and I do not agree with your assessment.

(Edited to clarify some phrasing)

LTC8K6 · 28th April 2005, 01:22 PM

Why don't you just crack a GSIC open and see if what's inside impresses you, Wellfed? It's only $10, after all.

The very idea that anyone would believe this item does anything at all, let alone spend money on it, let alone waste any more money and time testing it, is just about unbelievable to me.

It would be unbelievable had I not seen similar before....

Beleth · 28th April 2005, 01:28 PM

I'm talking about this latest "You agreed to this protocol" / "No I didn't" / "Yes you did, here's your e-mail to prove it" / "No I didn't, that's not the entire e-mail I sent you" (rule 8).

I don't know what was said in e-mail, and frankly I don't care. The only two who will ever know the truth are Michael and KRAMER, and unless one of them blinks, the rest of us will never know. So it's useless for the rest of us to comment on it.

Arguing over it only distracts us from the point of the the Challenge. So it really discourages me when I see such an argument happen.

Michael wants to not discuss this until October. So be it. Let's all be a little more mature than we have been and let this sleeping dog lie until then.

All of us. Including you, Michael. And you, KRAMER.
No more until October.

Skeptical Greg · 28th April 2005, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by LTC8K6
Why don't you just crack a GSIC open and see if what's inside impresses you, Wellfed? It's only $10, after all.

The very idea that anyone would believe this item does anything at all, let alone spend money on it, let alone waste any more money and time testing it, is just about unbelievable to me.

It would be unbelievable had I not seen similar before....

I highly doubt that Wellfed or anyone here is qualified to identify the circuitry necessary to realign the angular polarity of an audio CD.. That green wafer in your pic could have millions of transistors in it..

jj · 28th April 2005, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Diogenes
I highly doubt that Wellfed or anyone here is qualified to identify the circuitry necessary to realign the angular polarity of an audio CD.. That green wafer in your pic could have millions of transistors in it..

"angular polarity"

Say WHAT?

E_TELL_ME_YOU_ARE_KIDDING_PLEASE

Diogenes, is that line from their white paper? Oh. My head hurts and it's not just the sinus infection speaking.

Wellfed · 28th April 2005, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jmercer
...

This is how I see it, and I do not agree with your assessment.

This is not how I see it. I see the matter as simply as I have stated it. I went into the Challenge with confidence that I could prove my claim. This protocol was rejected for acceptable reasons and I was fine with the matter. I then ran into someone that reminded my of my upcoming reunion. This coupled with increasing anxiety over the notoriety potential of the Challenge prompted me to write a polite request to Kramer asking that my claim be put on hold until August. Since there was no particular effort being expended in designing a new protocol, other than my own efforts which were largely ignored, and also having viewed the Challenge FAQ which noted the customary timetable, I didn't think my REQUEST a big deal. It proved to be apparently. My time preference for testing was just slightly over 4 months distant, Kramer told me it was 6 months distant. I should have acquired a clue right then and there as to what I'd be up against. I am not so quick sometimes. Some wrangling ensued and I found that this wrangling affected my listening perception to such degree that I would HAVE to allow for some time to elapse after settling on a protocol. I erred on the side of caution when I stated that I wanted 3 months after the protocol was established to return to my "groove". This reality was deemed a joke by Kramer. More wrangling ensued, and near that time Steven Howard suggested a new protocol, I decided to call Kramer and see what we could find for a compromise. We had a very pleasant conversation and I believe we both thought we had worked out a solution. It turns out we hadn't. Some more wrangling occured, this time it turned more vicious, Kramer pulled his little "I waltzed into Randi's office with the Steven Howard protocol" bit and the two established it as "official". I had never agreed to this protocol without amendment. I was so incensed over him stating that I had agreed to the protocol and the spirit in which he presented the matter that I went on a terror around here for a few days, then Kramer did the same, recruiting someone to supplant me and stating that he might close my file because I was paranoid and delusional. While I regret some of the comments I made on my rant, I considered myself restrained for the most part. I believe to this day that Kramer's behavior during his rant included over the top measures and were foul play. I lost all confidence in the process, but somehow things settled down and Gr8wight stepped in to assist me with refining the Howard protocol to match my claimed ability. He was most helpful and it looked like we were about to make some progress. Kramer rejected certain aspects of the Gr8wight protocol effort and I was working on amendments when the **** hit the fan two days ago. Kramer made two blatant lies about my recent efforts and I decided enough was enough, I have much better things to do until October. Unfortunately this is the short version of our little saga.

I don't know if it was a coincidence, or not, but in hindsight I find it most curious that Kramer committed his most egregious acts just prior to my scheduled self-tests. I have my suspicions about the timing unfortunately. If the JREF Forum faithful need to believe that I somehow used Kramer's faults to get out of a test that I never "really" wanted to come to pass in this first place because of doubts they imagine I possess, well, all I can say is they have the right to any delusion they are willing to accept.

I will continue to document some of the misdeeds until tomorrow night when I plan to give it all a rest at this site. I will monitor the discussion for a while and then slip into oblivion until October. There are many here that I have greatly enjoyed meeting. All here that have behaved in a civil manner I thank. This includes you, jmercer. I have the utmost respect for well behaved individuals, especially when opinions run contrary to one another.

jmercer · 28th April 2005, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Beleth
I'm talking about this latest "You agreed to this protocol" / "No I didn't" / "Yes you did, here's your e-mail to prove it" / "No I didn't, that's not the entire e-mail I sent you" (rule 8).

I don't know what was said in e-mail, and frankly I don't care. The only two who will ever know the truth are Michael and KRAMER, and unless one of them blinks, the rest of us will never know. So it's useless for the rest of us to comment on it.

With all respect, Beleth, Mr. Anda posted the entire email here in this thread twice to establish the truth by "proving" Kramer lied about it... so everyone has full and unabridged access to that part of the protocol exchange to form their opinions. You can read it yourself, if you wish.

Gulliver - who appears qualifed to make this judgement - has stated that the email posted by Mr. Anda constituted a submission of protocol to JREF, who then accepted it... making it binding. Mr. Anda's subsequent dismissal of the protocol was a breach of contract at that point. (Again, according to Gulliver.)

Quote:

Originally posted by Beleth
Arguing over it only distracts us from the point of the the Challenge. So it really discourages me when I see such an argument happen.

Your frustration is shared, and I agree that arguing is a distraction from the Challenge. That doesn't mean it's not appropriate at times - even if it is distracting.

Quote:

Originally posted by Beleth

Michael wants to not discuss this until October. So be it. Let's all be a little more mature than we have been and let this sleeping dog lie until then.

All of us. Including you, Michael. And you, KRAMER.
No more until October.

Good advice. Enough has been said, I think.

Wellfed · 28th April 2005, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Diogenes
I highly doubt that Wellfed or anyone here is qualified to identify the circuitry necessary to realign the angular polarity of an audio CD.. That green wafer in your pic could have millions of transistors in it..

My auditory perception is the final arbiter as far as the matter concerns me. Color me impressed.

Wellfed · 28th April 2005, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jmercer
...

Gulliver - who appears qualifed to make this judgement - has stated that the email posted by Mr. Anda constituted a submission of protocol to JREF, who then accepted it... making it binding. Mr. Anda's subsequent dismissal of the protocol was a breach of contract at that point. (Again, according to Gulliver.)

...

I am not sure if Gulliver was working off the complete email and also chose to simply edit it a convenient point or if he simply believed what he posted WAS my complete correspondence to Kramer. I'm a bit mystified. I hope he writes back and clarifies the matter.

LTC8K6 · 28th April 2005, 02:05 PM

It wouldn't matter much what it had in it, as I'm sure the scammers who are selling it know. It can't have any effect on a CD.

Hey I know! If it improves a CD, it should also liven up DVD's!

Introducing our new Golden Video Intelligent Chip! Works the same way as our GSIC. Just place it on top of your DVD player.
Makes your DVD movies more vibrant! See the full rich color you were meant to see! Brings your old DVD movies back to full vibrant life!

Try our GVIC-10 today. Only $19.99! 10 DVD's
GVIC-30 $39.99 30 DVD's

NEW! Get our Golden Chip Extender! Replenishes your GSIC or GVIC up to ten times! Only $59.99. Now you can re-use your Golden chips! Place the extender on top of your old chip for 5 minutes. That's it! Now your Golden Chip is ready to use again like new!

GCEX $59.99

Skeptical Greg · 28th April 2005, 02:10 PM

So, what's keeping you from doing your own tests, and reporting back ( or just keep it to yourself if you want ), if just proving the device works, is all that this is about?

If you are honest ( with yourself or anyone ) , you shouldn't have a problem with this..

Beer monkey has come up with a great idea for a simple fool-proof test. ( if you can find an honest assistant to help )

From the other thread:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showt...post1870879229

Quote:

Frankly, if I were testing the geesick, I'd just want two discs, verified bit-for-bit identical, one treated. Play them for me in random order (ABBABABBABABBABAB, etc). I should be able to pick out the treated disc every time it plays.

I suggested that the selection should be one of your own favorites that you are very familiar with.. You would use two new copies of course..

kittynh · 28th April 2005, 02:26 PM

October? You have no faith in this object? None, nada?

What are you STILL using JREF as an excuse for?

October? What's going to change b etween now and October?

Go out and prove it, using the skeptic organization that WILL support you. Then rub Kramer and JREF's face in it.

Go out and just let it do what it does. Contact a college or university, find as many people and groups as you can to test test and test it.

Not the people that already support you.

Seriously, Joe Nickell is a great guy that is totally fair.

Then grab the million. But really....

this is small potatoes. Do what you have to do, but do it!

He said, I said. Who care who said what!

It's all about what you DO and what if your claim DOES what it is supposed to.

Your excuses and talk talk talk, makes me think you can't do it!

DO IT DO IT DO IT!!!

Gulliver · 28th April 2005, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Wellfed
I am not sure if Gulliver was working off the complete email and also chose to simply edit it a convenient point or if he simply believed what he posted WAS my complete correspondence to Kramer. I'm a bit mystified. I hope he writes back and clarifies the matter.

I believe that you may need to refresh your browser window. I know that I'm not seeing all posts without effort. Perhaps, Piano Teacher will consider reducing the stress on the forum's software by using a more conversational approach.

I responded to your challenge at 04-27-2005 11:16 PM, well before the post you made, quoted above.

To repeat, I need to see your email with headers and clear indications of beginning and end of the email. I caution you that by posting (and emailing) text with "----end---" who've caused confusion. I offer that a reasonable person would have been confused. You need to consider that your actions, however intended, may be the root cause of the problems.

LostAngeles · 28th April 2005, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by LTC8K6

It wouldn't matter much what it had in it, as I'm sure the scammers who are selling it know. It can't have any effect on a CD.

Hey I know! If it improves a CD, it should also liven up DVD's!

Introducing our new Golden Video Intelligent Chip! Works the same way as our GSIC. Just place it on top of your DVD player.
Makes your DVD movies more vibrant! See the full rich color you were meant to see! Brings your old DVD movies back to full vibrant life!

Try our GVIC-10 today. Only $19.99! 10 DVD's
GVIC-30 $39.99 30 DVD's

NEW! Get our Golden Chip Extender! Replenishes your GSIC or GVIC up to ten times! Only $59.99. Now you can re-use your Golden chips! Place the extender on top of your old chip for 5 minutes. That's it! Now your Golden Chip is ready to use again like new!

GCEX $59.99

The GSIC apparently works on DVDs and game discs too. Want to play me in some GSIC DDR?

jmercer · 28th April 2005, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by LostAngeles
The GSIC apparently works on DVDs and game discs too. Want to play me in some GSIC DDR?

Nah... I can't dance worth squat. But I'll play you in some Battlefield Vietnam!

LostAngeles · 28th April 2005, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jmercer
Nah... I can't dance worth squat. But I'll play you in some Battlefield Vietnam!

Neither can I. It'll be even.

Or you can watch me work my quarter-blackness at Space Channel 5. I can play that with my eyes closed.

Up, Down, Up-Down-Down, Chu, Chu, Chu.

Winterfrost · 28th April 2005, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by KRAMER
I didn't jump the gun in assuming it was an official protocol submission, and I did NOT copy it from the forum and hand it to Randi.

The Howard Protocol came to me as promised, at the time I was told it would come, via email, which is where all of our official correspondence took place.

That was only my opinion from what I had read. And I'm not sure if the second part was in response to me -- I never doubted that the SH protocol was emailed to you. I understand that is the only source for official correspondence.

Quote:

Originally posted by Gulliver
I seemed to have failed to explain to Winterfrost's satisfication that Wellfed did propose a protocol.... When you make a proposal, you are stating your willingness to accept it.

My point was simply that I think Anda indicated (assuming that the reposts of his email were accurate) that he wasn't actually submitting the protocol for approval, but more or less looking for comments. It was confusing with the "---end---" bit, but if I am reading it correctly his subsequent comments don't indicate that he wanted the protocol to be considered as it was:

Quote:

Originally posted by Wellfed
I will get back to you via email after Iâ€™ve re-read the Forum discussion about Stevenâ€™s proposal. Steven, and I, had a mild disagreement over a few parameters.

But... I don't want to pick nits. It doesn't matter at this point. It just makes me cringe when I see people break out any "legal" arguments considering how much the JREF hates that card being played on them.

The fact is that the email "submission" was confusing as Kramer says he was expecting a protocol around this time. But this was only one straw in the bale.

The test coulda/woulda/shoulda happened quickly and easily with more cooperation (re: self-testing) and less complication (re: changing conditions/timelines) from the applicant.

Gulliver · 28th April 2005, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Winterfrost

The test coulda/woulda/shoulda happened quickly and easily with more cooperation (re: self-testing) and less complication (re: changing conditions/timelines) from the applicant.

Your points are well received. You have expressed the essence of the problem. Good Job!

Warm regards,
Gulliver

kittynh · 28th April 2005, 03:35 PM

OK, if Columbus had waited for the maps to be redrawn before he set sail, he'd not even be a footnote in the history books.

Winny · 28th April 2005, 03:48 PM

From Wellfed's review here.

"Vastly superior to non-treated discs, providing for an exceptionally more believable presentation"

Vastly superior.

sheesh.

What sort of an audiophile needs 6 months and untold persnickity nonsense in order to hear a "vast" difference? Wellfed is not an audiophile. Audiophiles are able to appreciate subtle differences.

JMercer. I think this thread is ready for your fudge recipes.

Winny

Wellfed · 28th April 2005, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gulliver
I believe that you may need to refresh your browser window. I know that I'm not seeing all posts without effort. Perhaps, Piano Teacher will consider reducing the stress on the forum's software by using a more conversational approach.

I responded to your challenge at 04-27-2005 11:16 PM, well before the post you made, quoted above.

To repeat, I need to see your email with headers and clear indications of beginning and end of the email. I caution you that by posting (and emailing) text with "----end---" who've caused confusion. I offer that a reasonable person would have been confused. You need to consider that your actions, however intended, may be the root cause of the problems.

Everything in the body of my exhibit is what the body of my emailing to Kramer consisted of. I used the "Post subject:" line in the JREF Forum system to emulate the content of the subject line in the correspondence under question. Perhaps you didn't see my exhibit. It is located immediately below my post to you stating

"You can not be serious. Where is the rest of my text?"

-42- · 28th April 2005, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Wellfed
Everything in the body of my exhibit is what the body of my emailing to Kramer consisted of. I used the "Post subject:" line in the JREF Forum system to emulate the content of the subject line in the correspondence under question. Perhaps you didn't see my exhibit. It is located immediately below my post to you stating

"You can not be serious. Where is the rest of my text?"

Who cares. We're talking about 6 months here... Oh, excuse me, "until october"

Even if he did accidently leave off your 4-5 "comments" about adapting the protocol you should have adapted it before sending!

Very VERY easy to make! Even if people never cook - very good too!

COCKTAIL SAUSAGE BALLS

1 lb. sausage (hot or mild -- your choice) - uncooked
2 1/2 cups Bisquick
2 cups sharp grated cheese (the finely shredded is easier to work with)

Mix together and roll into balls. Bake 400 for approximately 15 minutes.

These are great, easy and cheap.

LostAngeles · 28th April 2005, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Wellfed
Everything in the body of my exhibit is what the body of my emailing to Kramer consisted of. I used the "Post subject:" line in the JREF Forum system to emulate the content of the subject line in the correspondence under question. Perhaps you didn't see my exhibit. It is located immediately below my post to you stating

"You can not be serious. Where is the rest of my text?"

All I see is someone who was certain he had a million bucks but then waffled and whined his way into a rejection. I'd snark some more, but Darat's enforcing the civility rule, it seems.

The Central Scrutinizer · 28th April 2005, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by LostAngeles
The GSIC apparently works on DVDs...too

Can it make Adam Sandler movies funny?

LostAngeles · 28th April 2005, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Central Scrutinizer
Can it make Adam Sandler movies funny?

Look, the GSIC can turn water into wine, is the black private dick who's a sex machine to all the chicks, and has Great-Wall-of-China vision. It can't do what you're asking. It's not a miracle worker.

Z · 28th April 2005, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Central Scrutinizer
Can it make Adam Sandler movies funny?

There's not enough Niobium in the world to accomplish that feat.

...

Well, I did enjoy 'Water Boy'...

THE SHAME! THE SHAME!!!

Wellfed · 28th April 2005, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Winny
From Wellfed's review here.

"Vastly superior to non-treated discs, providing for an exceptionally more believable presentation"

Vastly superior.

sheesh.

What sort of an audiophile needs 6 months and untold persnickity nonsense in order to hear a "vast" difference? Wellfed is not an audiophile. Audiophiles are able to appreciate subtle differences.

JMercer. I think this thread is ready for your fudge recipes.

Winny

Winny, Winny, Winny, are you telling me that I made so many persnickety requests as to make the Challenge testing an impossibility? You need to re-read the record as you have missed some very important discussion. And also, are you so daft as to seriously suggest that I've requested 6 months to prove my claim at any time? Are the blatant misrepresentations I see I around here, on an all too regular basis, the workings of critical minds? There is something truly mystifying going on around this place.

BTW, art appreciation is a very subjective matter. Small nuances are appreciated and many times viewed as profound by aficionados.

And speaking of perception, you mean to tell me that I am being accused of exageration by one like you? You had better take a real close look in your own mirror and tell me what you see? Sheesh is right!

Gulliver · 28th April 2005, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Wellfed
Everything in the body of my exhibit is what the body of my emailing to Kramer consisted of. I used the "Post subject:" line in the JREF Forum system to emulate the content of the subject line in the correspondence under question. Perhaps you didn't see my exhibit. It is located immediately below my post to you stating

"You can not be serious. Where is the rest of my text?"

I will assume good will on your part. Even though you've refused to provide the headers, even after I requested them twice, I will assume that you've accurately presented the email.

After careful review and a skeptical approach, I must side with JREF. Your email presents a protocol. You ask for JREF's opinion. You do not state that the proposal is a draft. You do not reserve the right to amend the protocol. The only out would be that you have the right to a contingency plan for a tube failure. On this point you might have continued some negotiation, but the general agreement was in place the moment you learned that JREF had accepted your protocol.

The world expects the communicator to be clear. Your format was confusing. You did not take sufficient time to prepare your thoughts. The fault lies with you. You have no grounds to complain that JREF considered your protocol one that you accepted.

Furthermore, I believe the rules are clear. You should not look to October 2005, but rather March 2006. I don't intent to provide you with any more counsel until then.

You're welcome to further demonstrate your lack of communications skills by insulting me (or others). But understand that I do have a memory, and you might just need my help next March.

Regards,
Gulliver

prewitt81 · 28th April 2005, 06:04 PM

I can imagine the conversation:

KRAMER and Randi are listening to a CD that's been "treated".

Randi: My god! It's glorious!

KRAMER: I know! Snap out of it man! Don't you see? This Wellfed character is going to waltz in here and snatch the Million right out of our hands. It's curtains for us, curtains I say!

Randi: Why, we'll be vagabonds! But at least we'll have this heavenly music to . . .

KRAMER: Enough about the sweet, sweet sounds! No one can deny that this magical piece of plastic works and works well - that much is obvious. But our livelyhood is at stake! I have a plan. A plan that will protect our precious money from the truth. . . We'll crush Wellfed with lies and deceit!

Randi (shuddering): But Wellfed is a man of the highest integrity. He has followed through on every single statement he has ever made in the forums. Not once has he backed down or waffled.

KRAMER: Well then, we'll just have to pull out all the stops won't we?

Randi (grinning): Ah KRAMER, you're so deliciously evil.

27th April 2005, 07:29 PM	#801
jmercer Question Everything Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Facing the unfaceable Posts: 12,259	PT - there are actually some people who are fairly knowledgeble about physics on this forum, athough I haven't seen any of them participate in this particular thread. The problem you are encountering here is simply that you write the longest posts I've ever seen. People who read them and understand them are at a complete loss on how to effectively respond to them, because the bulletin board doesn't lend itself to efficient text quoting and manipulation. Allow me to suggest that you provide the fundamentals of your views first in a summarized synopsis. Those points that are questioned can then be elaborated upon in a conversational manner, while the ones that are accepted need no further explanation.
	__________________ "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke, British Statesman and Philosopher, 1729-1797 "Cheeky Monkey!" - Chillzero "Daft Sausage!" - Tkingdoll "Context is everything, and sophistry will not protect you." - chillzero

27th April 2005, 08:16 PM	#802
Gulliver Thinker Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 215	Wellfed's Last Chance As Far As I'm Concerned Quote: Originally posted by Wellfed You can not be serious. Where is the rest of my text? I'll supply it in my next post along with the subject line as originally presented. I assure you that I'm perfectly, and professionally, serious. You need to understand that I am concerned only with the text of the email that you sent personally to Kramer. Unless you made it clear within that email that you were just joking around, having idle thoughts, or some other excuse, you made a proposal for a protocol. You accepted it the moment you pressed the "SEND" button. (This is the mailbox rule of contract law.) If you wish to win any respect from me at this point, your response should include the exact text of the email, along with headers. Do not tell me what you meant. Do not tell me what you said afterwards. The unadulterated, unembellished email will speak for itself. This is your last chance as far as I'm concerned. I was skeptical of Kramer's position and yours, but the evidence, so far, points toward you as the wrongful party in these failed negotiations.
Gulliver Thinker Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 215

27th April 2005, 08:19 PM	#803
Z D.D.D. Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: In a den in my lair, on the edge of your mind. Posts: 9,166	Re: Re: Quick Reply to One Point by DevilsAdvocate Quote: Originally posted by Wellfed Well at least you hate to say it. We could of course say that there is the possibility that everyone here has not been truthful except for Kramer who has already been established as having been untruthful with at least three statements. This assumption is valid for the sake of your argument, but in reality I was sold on the GSIC before hearing the manufacturers claims. I personally don't accept the GSIC manufacturers explanation as sensible. I personally think the effect is due to an alteration of the polycarbonate substrate. I have no scientific basis for my belief, it is simply what makes sense to me. So you're saying, this chip somehow affects a physical alteration in the plastic bottom of the CD? Does it work the same on CD-Rs? For surely you are aware that a CD-R has a spiral-groove polycarb layer, rather than a pitted polycarb layer... And that's pretty dangerous radiation, that can alter the BOTTOM of a CD from the TOP of the player, through layers of metals and plastics (without refraction or distortion), to PERMANENTLY ALTER your CDs... Yeah, I can tell you have no scientific basis for your beliefs. But that's OK - you also can't tell confusion for lies, and are at a total loss about cursing. I know you for what you are. And now everyone can know, as well. Thanks.
	__________________ Merry Yarglemas!

27th April 2005, 08:20 PM	#804
Z D.D.D. Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: In a den in my lair, on the edge of your mind. Posts: 9,166	Re: Wellfed's Last Chance As Far As I'm Concerned Quote: Originally posted by Gulliver I assure you that I'm perfectly, and professionally, serious. You need to understand that I am concerned only with the text of the email that you sent personally to Kramer. Unless you made it clear within that email that you were just joking around, having idle thoughts, or some other excuse, you made a proposal for a protocol. You accepted it the moment you pressed the "SEND" button. (This is the mailbox rule of contract law.) If you wish to win any respect from me at this point, your response should include the exact text of the email, along with headers. Do not tell me what you meant. Do not tell me what you said afterwards. The unadulterated, unembellished email will speak for itself. This is your last chance as far as I'm concerned. I was skeptical of Kramer's position and yours, but the evidence, so far, points toward you as the wrongful party in these failed negotiations. Yeah, just look at the heading, Welf... When you put 'Proposal' on the top of an e-mail, that means you are submitting a proposal - a proposal that they accepted. So this nonsense you're doing now is waffling about. Typical, though - disappointing, and typical.
	__________________ Merry Yarglemas!

27th April 2005, 11:38 PM	#805
Darat Lackey Administrator / JREF Forum Liaison Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 64,804	Re: Re: Quick Reply to One Point by DevilsAdvocate Quote: Originally posted by Wellfed Well at least you hate to say it. We could of course say that there is the possibility that everyone here has not been truthful except for Kramer who has already been established as having been untruthful with at least three statements. ...snip.. It has not been established in this thread. When will you post the information that you asked to be asked for?
	__________________ If it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart? - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn 1918-2008

28th April 2005, 06:37 AM	#806
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	PianoTeacher said: Quote: As we have established, the GSIC claims to alter the disk physically, and permanently. After that alteration, there are normal expectations that changes in the disk can indeed alter the sound: nothing paranormal. Note the bold.... There certainly are not any such expectations! ( by anyone who understands how CD audio works ) Since we haven't been reminded of this for a while, here you go.. A CD does not contain sound. It contains data. Any alteration of that disk, that changes the value of the data, as it is read, would only result in CRC errors and skips if the errors could not be corrected. If the errors can be corrected, then the resulting sound will be indistinguishable from that of an unaltered disk. Knowing how a CD works is all we need to know, to also know that the device cannot do what the manufacturers claim. However, if Wellfed ( or anyone ) can indeed distinguish ( beyond chance ) between CD's that have been exposed to the device and those that have not, then he indeed posseses some paranormal ability that we cannot account for, and would certainly be entitled to the prize if he could demonstrate that ability..
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

28th April 2005, 09:59 AM	#807
Wellfed Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 427	Re: Wellfed's Last Chance As Far As I'm Concerned Quote: Originally posted by Gulliver I assure you that I'm perfectly, and professionally, serious. You need to understand that I am concerned only with the text of the email that you sent personally to Kramer. Unless you made it clear within that email that you were just joking around, having idle thoughts, or some other excuse, you made a proposal for a protocol. You accepted it the moment you pressed the "SEND" button. (This is the mailbox rule of contract law.) If you wish to win any respect from me at this point, your response should include the exact text of the email, along with headers. Do not tell me what you meant. Do not tell me what you said afterwards. The unadulterated, unembellished email will speak for itself. This is your last chance as far as I'm concerned. I was skeptical of Kramer's position and yours, but the evidence, so far, points toward you as the wrongful party in these failed negotiations. I posted the entire content of my email immediately below my post where I stated that you can't be serious. I used the JREF Forum subject line to display the original subject line contents of the email in question.
Wellfed Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 427

28th April 2005, 10:23 AM	#808
Wellfed Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 427	Quote: Originally posted by KRAMER I didn't jump the gun in assuming it was an official protocol submission, and I did NOT copy it from the forum and hand it to Randi. The Howard Protocol came to me as promised, at the time I was told it would come, via email, which is where all of our official correspondence took place. Only informal discussions take place in the forum. Mr. Anda was anxious to get a response from Randi on it, too. There was absolutely no indication that it was anything other than what Anda told me it was. Let me put it another way: Anda worked for a good amount of time with one or two forum members on devising the Howard Protocol. Here's my question: Did any of those who worked on it with him, finished it with him, and were aware that it was being submitted for approval have ANY notion that said submission was anything BUT "official"? The first time I heard this fairy tail about it not having really been an official protocol was after I told him it had been accepted. End of story. I never claimed that you copied it off the Forum. You requested that I copy it off the Forum and send it to you. I separated Steven's content from my own with a clear division. Everything after this division were my own comments. Here is the content of the email with Steven's protocol edited out for brevity. His protocol was copied and pasted above the division marking in my original correspondence. ----------------end----------------- This is Mr. Howardâ€™s proposal exactly as he posted it. I later responded to him with some minor changes I would expect. If memory serves me, I asked that the 11th disc he mentions be a non GSIC treated reference disc that I could swap in and out to compare with the subject disc at will. I will review my comments to him on the Forum to see if there is anything I am forgetting We will need to establish the amount of time necessary to complete this test. We will need to discuss whether burned copies or original CDâ€™s are to be used. I havenâ€™t established an opinion on the subject myself. If possible, I think I would prefer that T2 leave the room as I make each identification. A contingency plan for tube failure will need to be implemented. I will get back to you via email after Iâ€™ve re-read the Forum discussion about Stevenâ€™s proposal. Steven, and I, had a mild disagreement over a few parameters. I donâ€™t think that my requests altered the integrity of the test. His commentary was to the effect of â€œIf the device makes such a big improvement you shouldnâ€™t need the changesâ€, this element of the discussion went no further. It is my hope that we are back on track with this process, I sense you are of the same mind.
Wellfed Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 427

28th April 2005, 10:30 AM	#809
Wellfed Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 427	Re: Re: Re: Quick Reply to One Point by DevilsAdvocate Quote: Originally posted by Darat It has not been established in this thread. When will you post the information that you asked to be asked for? I am positive that it has. Take a look at my posts on the upper half of page 20 in this thread. I will get you the promised information within a few days at the latest. I only intend to offer some representative examples, not the totality of the matter.
Wellfed Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 427

28th April 2005, 10:57 AM	#810
drkitten Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Wits' End Posts: 21,647	Re: Re: Re: Re: Quick Reply to One Point by DevilsAdvocate Quote: Originally posted by Wellfed I only intend to offer some representative examples, not the totality of the matter. I strongly suggest that you reconsider. If you have evidence, present all of it.

28th April 2005, 11:26 AM	#811
Beleth FAQ Creator Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Not in a cave Posts: 4,134	And yet another Challenge that started off so promisingly turns into nothing but a he-said-she-said shouting match. When exactly did brinksmanship become more important than discovering the truth in this matter? Don't tell me it hasn't, because it's plain to everyone that it has. How utterly useless.
	__________________ Administrator and Head Moderator, The Skeptic's Guide to the Universe Forum Big Fan, Stop Sylvia Browne I will come back only after the words "Hi, Nyarl!" are returned to the post http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...5&postcount=14 .

28th April 2005, 12:36 PM	#812
jmercer Question Everything Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Facing the unfaceable Posts: 12,259	Quote: Originally posted by Beleth When exactly did brinksmanship become more important than discovering the truth in this matter? Don't tell me it hasn't, because it's plain to everyone that it has. How utterly useless. Beleth, I respect you, and often enjoy your posts. I certainly was impressed by your FAQ... however, please don't lump me in with "everyone", because I don't agree with your assessment. I am of the firm opinion that Mr. Anda made a rash decision in applying for the Challenge here, motivated by the stinging ridicule of his peers at Audio Asylum and Randi's commentary . Quote: From Mr. Anda's Application This device was refered to as a "MAJOR SWINDLE IN OPERATION" and as a "FRAUD" in a recent www.randi.org newsletter. My review of this device at Audio Asylum is also a topic of discussion at the www.randi.org discussion site where I am ridiculed for claiming to hear an effect using the GSIC. The claim to be tested under your Challenge is my ability to detect a difference between a GSIC-treated disc from a non-treated disc through simple listening tests. I also believe that once he realized he couldn't succeed at the Challenge and vindicate himself, he also realized that he'd placed himself in a position where withdrawal of his claim would mean further (possibly irreparable) public loss of his credibility. Finally, I believe that all of Mr. Anda's gyrations (documented in the Application thread and summed up in my previous post) were attempts on his part to delay and derail his testing. I believe he did so in the hopes that interest here would subside, or that JREF would close his file in a way that he could absolve himself from failure, if not blame. He succeeded in getting his file closed; he failed in absolving himself, as multiple posters here have indicated. If there was any brinkmanship involved, it was Mr. Anda's efforts to push Kramer and JREF over the brink of patience so he could escape the consequences of his rash and public committment. This is how I see it, and I do not agree with your assessment. (Edited to clarify some phrasing)
	__________________ "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke, British Statesman and Philosopher, 1729-1797 "Cheeky Monkey!" - Chillzero "Daft Sausage!" - Tkingdoll "Context is everything, and sophistry will not protect you." - chillzero

28th April 2005, 01:22 PM	#813
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,695	Why don't you just crack a GSIC open and see if what's inside impresses you, Wellfed? It's only $10, after all. The very idea that anyone would believe this item does anything at all, let alone spend money on it, let alone waste any more money and time testing it, is just about unbelievable to me. It would be unbelievable had I not seen similar before....

28th April 2005, 01:28 PM	#814
Beleth FAQ Creator Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Not in a cave Posts: 4,134	I'm talking about this latest "You agreed to this protocol" / "No I didn't" / "Yes you did, here's your e-mail to prove it" / "No I didn't, that's not the entire e-mail I sent you" (rule 8). I don't know what was said in e-mail, and frankly I don't care. The only two who will ever know the truth are Michael and KRAMER, and unless one of them blinks, the rest of us will never know. So it's useless for the rest of us to comment on it. Arguing over it only distracts us from the point of the the Challenge. So it really discourages me when I see such an argument happen. Michael wants to not discuss this until October. So be it. Let's all be a little more mature than we have been and let this sleeping dog lie until then. All of us. Including you, Michael. And you, KRAMER. No more until October.
	__________________ Administrator and Head Moderator, The Skeptic's Guide to the Universe Forum Big Fan, Stop Sylvia Browne I will come back only after the words "Hi, Nyarl!" are returned to the post http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...5&postcount=14 .

28th April 2005, 01:28 PM	#815
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	Quote: Originally posted by LTC8K6 Why don't you just crack a GSIC open and see if what's inside impresses you, Wellfed? It's only $10, after all. The very idea that anyone would believe this item does anything at all, let alone spend money on it, let alone waste any more money and time testing it, is just about unbelievable to me. It would be unbelievable had I not seen similar before.... I highly doubt that Wellfed or anyone here is qualified to identify the circuitry necessary to realign the angular polarity of an audio CD.. That green wafer in your pic could have millions of transistors in it..
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

28th April 2005, 01:37 PM	#816
jj grumpy old skeptic Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Deep in the rain Posts: 18,520	Quote: Originally posted by Diogenes I highly doubt that Wellfed or anyone here is qualified to identify the circuitry necessary to realign the angular polarity of an audio CD.. That green wafer in your pic could have millions of transistors in it.. "angular polarity" Say WHAT? E_TELL_ME_YOU_ARE_KIDDING_PLEASE Diogenes, is that line from their white paper? Oh. My head hurts and it's not just the sinus infection speaking.
	__________________ The Power to Quit

28th April 2005, 01:42 PM	#817
Wellfed Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 427	Quote: Originally posted by jmercer ... This is how I see it, and I do not agree with your assessment. This is not how I see it. I see the matter as simply as I have stated it. I went into the Challenge with confidence that I could prove my claim. This protocol was rejected for acceptable reasons and I was fine with the matter. I then ran into someone that reminded my of my upcoming reunion. This coupled with increasing anxiety over the notoriety potential of the Challenge prompted me to write a polite request to Kramer asking that my claim be put on hold until August. Since there was no particular effort being expended in designing a new protocol, other than my own efforts which were largely ignored, and also having viewed the Challenge FAQ which noted the customary timetable, I didn't think my REQUEST a big deal. It proved to be apparently. My time preference for testing was just slightly over 4 months distant, Kramer told me it was 6 months distant. I should have acquired a clue right then and there as to what I'd be up against. I am not so quick sometimes. Some wrangling ensued and I found that this wrangling affected my listening perception to such degree that I would HAVE to allow for some time to elapse after settling on a protocol. I erred on the side of caution when I stated that I wanted 3 months after the protocol was established to return to my "groove". This reality was deemed a joke by Kramer. More wrangling ensued, and near that time Steven Howard suggested a new protocol, I decided to call Kramer and see what we could find for a compromise. We had a very pleasant conversation and I believe we both thought we had worked out a solution. It turns out we hadn't. Some more wrangling occured, this time it turned more vicious, Kramer pulled his little "I waltzed into Randi's office with the Steven Howard protocol" bit and the two established it as "official". I had never agreed to this protocol without amendment. I was so incensed over him stating that I had agreed to the protocol and the spirit in which he presented the matter that I went on a terror around here for a few days, then Kramer did the same, recruiting someone to supplant me and stating that he might close my file because I was paranoid and delusional. While I regret some of the comments I made on my rant, I considered myself restrained for the most part. I believe to this day that Kramer's behavior during his rant included over the top measures and were foul play. I lost all confidence in the process, but somehow things settled down and Gr8wight stepped in to assist me with refining the Howard protocol to match my claimed ability. He was most helpful and it looked like we were about to make some progress. Kramer rejected certain aspects of the Gr8wight protocol effort and I was working on amendments when the **** hit the fan two days ago. Kramer made two blatant lies about my recent efforts and I decided enough was enough, I have much better things to do until October. Unfortunately this is the short version of our little saga. I don't know if it was a coincidence, or not, but in hindsight I find it most curious that Kramer committed his most egregious acts just prior to my scheduled self-tests. I have my suspicions about the timing unfortunately. If the JREF Forum faithful need to believe that I somehow used Kramer's faults to get out of a test that I never "really" wanted to come to pass in this first place because of doubts they imagine I possess, well, all I can say is they have the right to any delusion they are willing to accept. I will continue to document some of the misdeeds until tomorrow night when I plan to give it all a rest at this site. I will monitor the discussion for a while and then slip into oblivion until October. There are many here that I have greatly enjoyed meeting. All here that have behaved in a civil manner I thank. This includes you, jmercer. I have the utmost respect for well behaved individuals, especially when opinions run contrary to one another.
Wellfed Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 427

28th April 2005, 01:55 PM	#818
jmercer Question Everything Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Facing the unfaceable Posts: 12,259	Quote: Originally posted by Beleth I'm talking about this latest "You agreed to this protocol" / "No I didn't" / "Yes you did, here's your e-mail to prove it" / "No I didn't, that's not the entire e-mail I sent you" (rule 8). I don't know what was said in e-mail, and frankly I don't care. The only two who will ever know the truth are Michael and KRAMER, and unless one of them blinks, the rest of us will never know. So it's useless for the rest of us to comment on it. With all respect, Beleth, Mr. Anda posted the entire email here in this thread twice to establish the truth by "proving" Kramer lied about it... so everyone has full and unabridged access to that part of the protocol exchange to form their opinions. You can read it yourself, if you wish. Gulliver - who appears qualifed to make this judgement - has stated that the email posted by Mr. Anda constituted a submission of protocol to JREF, who then accepted it... making it binding. Mr. Anda's subsequent dismissal of the protocol was a breach of contract at that point. (Again, according to Gulliver.) Quote: Originally posted by Beleth Arguing over it only distracts us from the point of the the Challenge. So it really discourages me when I see such an argument happen. Your frustration is shared, and I agree that arguing is a distraction from the Challenge. That doesn't mean it's not appropriate at times - even if it is distracting. Quote: Originally posted by Beleth Michael wants to not discuss this until October. So be it. Let's all be a little more mature than we have been and let this sleeping dog lie until then. All of us. Including you, Michael. And you, KRAMER. No more until October. Good advice. Enough has been said, I think.
	__________________ "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke, British Statesman and Philosopher, 1729-1797 "Cheeky Monkey!" - Chillzero "Daft Sausage!" - Tkingdoll "Context is everything, and sophistry will not protect you." - chillzero

28th April 2005, 01:55 PM	#819
Wellfed Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 427	Quote: Originally posted by Diogenes I highly doubt that Wellfed or anyone here is qualified to identify the circuitry necessary to realign the angular polarity of an audio CD.. That green wafer in your pic could have millions of transistors in it.. My auditory perception is the final arbiter as far as the matter concerns me. Color me impressed.
Wellfed Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 427

28th April 2005, 02:02 PM	#820
Wellfed Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 427	Quote: Originally posted by jmercer ... Gulliver - who appears qualifed to make this judgement - has stated that the email posted by Mr. Anda constituted a submission of protocol to JREF, who then accepted it... making it binding. Mr. Anda's subsequent dismissal of the protocol was a breach of contract at that point. (Again, according to Gulliver.) ... I am not sure if Gulliver was working off the complete email and also chose to simply edit it a convenient point or if he simply believed what he posted WAS my complete correspondence to Kramer. I'm a bit mystified. I hope he writes back and clarifies the matter.
Wellfed Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 427

28th April 2005, 02:05 PM	#821
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,695	It wouldn't matter much what it had in it, as I'm sure the scammers who are selling it know. It can't have any effect on a CD. Hey I know! If it improves a CD, it should also liven up DVD's! Introducing our new Golden Video Intelligent Chip! Works the same way as our GSIC. Just place it on top of your DVD player. Makes your DVD movies more vibrant! See the full rich color you were meant to see! Brings your old DVD movies back to full vibrant life! Try our GVIC-10 today. Only $19.99! 10 DVD's GVIC-30 $39.99 30 DVD's NEW! Get our Golden Chip Extender! Replenishes your GSIC or GVIC up to ten times! Only $59.99. Now you can re-use your Golden chips! Place the extender on top of your old chip for 5 minutes. That's it! Now your Golden Chip is ready to use again like new! GCEX $59.99

28th April 2005, 02:10 PM	#822
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	So, what's keeping you from doing your own tests, and reporting back ( or just keep it to yourself if you want ), if just proving the device works, is all that this is about? If you are honest ( with yourself or anyone ) , you shouldn't have a problem with this.. Beer monkey has come up with a great idea for a simple fool-proof test. ( if you can find an honest assistant to help ) From the other thread: http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showt...post1870879229 Quote: Frankly, if I were testing the geesick, I'd just want two discs, verified bit-for-bit identical, one treated. Play them for me in random order (ABBABABBABABBABAB, etc). I should be able to pick out the treated disc every time it plays. I suggested that the selection should be one of your own favorites that you are very familiar with.. You would use two new copies of course..
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

28th April 2005, 02:26 PM	#823
kittynh The Hupsu Detective auctioneer Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: If I told the aliens could find me, and you know they read this forum Posts: 22,707	October? You have no faith in this object? None, nada? What are you STILL using JREF as an excuse for? October? What's going to change b etween now and October? Go out and prove it, using the skeptic organization that WILL support you. Then rub Kramer and JREF's face in it. Go out and just let it do what it does. Contact a college or university, find as many people and groups as you can to test test and test it. Not the people that already support you. Seriously, Joe Nickell is a great guy that is totally fair. Then grab the million. But really.... this is small potatoes. Do what you have to do, but do it! He said, I said. Who care who said what! It's all about what you DO and what if your claim DOES what it is supposed to. Your excuses and talk talk talk, makes me think you can't do it! DO IT DO IT DO IT!!!

28th April 2005, 02:51 PM	#824
Gulliver Thinker Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 215	Please respond regarding email of proposal Quote: Originally posted by Wellfed I am not sure if Gulliver was working off the complete email and also chose to simply edit it a convenient point or if he simply believed what he posted WAS my complete correspondence to Kramer. I'm a bit mystified. I hope he writes back and clarifies the matter. I believe that you may need to refresh your browser window. I know that I'm not seeing all posts without effort. Perhaps, Piano Teacher will consider reducing the stress on the forum's software by using a more conversational approach. I responded to your challenge at 04-27-2005 11:16 PM, well before the post you made, quoted above. To repeat, I need to see your email with headers and clear indications of beginning and end of the email. I caution you that by posting (and emailing) text with "----end---" who've caused confusion. I offer that a reasonable person would have been confused. You need to consider that your actions, however intended, may be the root cause of the problems.
Gulliver Thinker Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 215

28th April 2005, 02:57 PM	#825
LostAngeles Anti-WM Jihadist Join Date: May 2004 Location: Having a cup of tea. Posts: 10,159	Quote: Originally posted by LTC8K6 It wouldn't matter much what it had in it, as I'm sure the scammers who are selling it know. It can't have any effect on a CD. Hey I know! If it improves a CD, it should also liven up DVD's! Introducing our new Golden Video Intelligent Chip! Works the same way as our GSIC. Just place it on top of your DVD player. Makes your DVD movies more vibrant! See the full rich color you were meant to see! Brings your old DVD movies back to full vibrant life! Try our GVIC-10 today. Only $19.99! 10 DVD's GVIC-30 $39.99 30 DVD's NEW! Get our Golden Chip Extender! Replenishes your GSIC or GVIC up to ten times! Only $59.99. Now you can re-use your Golden chips! Place the extender on top of your old chip for 5 minutes. That's it! Now your Golden Chip is ready to use again like new! GCEX $59.99 The GSIC apparently works on DVDs and game discs too. Want to play me in some GSIC DDR?
	__________________ "There is also a likelihood that the settlement will fall between two biomes, potentially hazardous if the player expects a peaceful oceanside meadow, without realizing the ocean is full of amphibious zombie whales." - Dwarf Fortress Wik

28th April 2005, 03:00 PM	#826
jmercer Question Everything Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Facing the unfaceable Posts: 12,259	Quote: Originally posted by LostAngeles The GSIC apparently works on DVDs and game discs too. Want to play me in some GSIC DDR? Nah... I can't dance worth squat. But I'll play you in some Battlefield Vietnam!
	__________________ "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke, British Statesman and Philosopher, 1729-1797 "Cheeky Monkey!" - Chillzero "Daft Sausage!" - Tkingdoll "Context is everything, and sophistry will not protect you." - chillzero

28th April 2005, 03:08 PM	#827
LostAngeles Anti-WM Jihadist Join Date: May 2004 Location: Having a cup of tea. Posts: 10,159	Quote: Originally posted by jmercer Nah... I can't dance worth squat. But I'll play you in some Battlefield Vietnam! Neither can I. It'll be even. Or you can watch me work my quarter-blackness at Space Channel 5. I can play that with my eyes closed. Up, Down, Up-Down-Down, Chu, Chu, Chu.
	__________________ "There is also a likelihood that the settlement will fall between two biomes, potentially hazardous if the player expects a peaceful oceanside meadow, without realizing the ocean is full of amphibious zombie whales." - Dwarf Fortress Wik

28th April 2005, 03:09 PM	#828
Winterfrost Scholar Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 86	Quote: Originally posted by KRAMER I didn't jump the gun in assuming it was an official protocol submission, and I did NOT copy it from the forum and hand it to Randi. The Howard Protocol came to me as promised, at the time I was told it would come, via email, which is where all of our official correspondence took place. That was only my opinion from what I had read. And I'm not sure if the second part was in response to me -- I never doubted that the SH protocol was emailed to you. I understand that is the only source for official correspondence. Quote: Originally posted by Gulliver I seemed to have failed to explain to Winterfrost's satisfication that Wellfed did propose a protocol.... When you make a proposal, you are stating your willingness to accept it. My point was simply that I think Anda indicated (assuming that the reposts of his email were accurate) that he wasn't actually submitting the protocol for approval, but more or less looking for comments. It was confusing with the "---end---" bit, but if I am reading it correctly his subsequent comments don't indicate that he wanted the protocol to be considered as it was: Quote: Originally posted by Wellfed I will get back to you via email after Iâ€™ve re-read the Forum discussion about Stevenâ€™s proposal. Steven, and I, had a mild disagreement over a few parameters. But... I don't want to pick nits. It doesn't matter at this point. It just makes me cringe when I see people break out any "legal" arguments considering how much the JREF hates that card being played on them. The fact is that the email "submission" was confusing as Kramer says he was expecting a protocol around this time. But this was only one straw in the bale. The test coulda/woulda/shoulda happened quickly and easily with more cooperation (re: self-testing) and less complication (re: changing conditions/timelines) from the applicant.
	__________________ "The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance -- it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin "Incredulity doesn't kill curiosity; it encourages it." - Umberto Eco

28th April 2005, 03:27 PM	#829
Gulliver Thinker Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 215	Winterfrost is eloquent. Quote: Originally posted by Winterfrost The test coulda/woulda/shoulda happened quickly and easily with more cooperation (re: self-testing) and less complication (re: changing conditions/timelines) from the applicant. Your points are well received. You have expressed the essence of the problem. Good Job! Warm regards, Gulliver
Gulliver Thinker Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 215

28th April 2005, 03:35 PM	#830
kittynh The Hupsu Detective auctioneer Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: If I told the aliens could find me, and you know they read this forum Posts: 22,707	OK, if Columbus had waited for the maps to be redrawn before he set sail, he'd not even be a footnote in the history books.

28th April 2005, 03:48 PM	#831
Winny Critical Thinker Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: is everything. Posts: 466	From Wellfed's review here. "Vastly superior to non-treated discs, providing for an exceptionally more believable presentation" *Vastly superior.* sheesh. What sort of an audiophile needs 6 months and untold persnickity nonsense in order to hear a "vast" difference? Wellfed is not an audiophile. Audiophiles are able to appreciate subtle differences. JMercer. I think this thread is ready for your fudge recipes. Winny
	__________________ Winny isn't everything. He's the only thing - Marquis de Carabas I'll get you, Winny, and your little country, too - clarsct you sever the spinal cord of the frog by inserting a needle into its spine - roger

28th April 2005, 03:59 PM	#832
Wellfed Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 427	Re: Please respond regarding email of proposal Quote: Originally posted by Gulliver I believe that you may need to refresh your browser window. I know that I'm not seeing all posts without effort. Perhaps, Piano Teacher will consider reducing the stress on the forum's software by using a more conversational approach. I responded to your challenge at 04-27-2005 11:16 PM, well before the post you made, quoted above. To repeat, I need to see your email with headers and clear indications of beginning and end of the email. I caution you that by posting (and emailing) text with "----end---" who've caused confusion. I offer that a reasonable person would have been confused. You need to consider that your actions, however intended, may be the root cause of the problems. Everything in the body of my exhibit is what the body of my emailing to Kramer consisted of. I used the "Post subject:" line in the JREF Forum system to emulate the content of the subject line in the correspondence under question. Perhaps you didn't see my exhibit. It is located immediately below my post to you stating "You can not be serious. Where is the rest of my text?"
Wellfed Banned Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 427

28th April 2005, 04:13 PM	#833
-42- Thinker Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 153	Re: Re: Please respond regarding email of proposal Quote: Originally posted by Wellfed Everything in the body of my exhibit is what the body of my emailing to Kramer consisted of. I used the "Post subject:" line in the JREF Forum system to emulate the content of the subject line in the correspondence under question. Perhaps you didn't see my exhibit. It is located immediately below my post to you stating "You can not be serious. Where is the rest of my text?" Who cares. We're talking about 6 months here... Oh, excuse me, "until october" Even if he did accidently leave off your 4-5 "comments" about adapting the protocol you should have adapted it before sending! Very VERY easy to make! Even if people never cook - very good too! COCKTAIL SAUSAGE BALLS 1 lb. sausage (hot or mild -- your choice) - uncooked 2 1/2 cups Bisquick 2 cups sharp grated cheese (the finely shredded is easier to work with) Mix together and roll into balls. Bake 400 for approximately 15 minutes. These are great, easy and cheap.
-42- Thinker Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 153	__________________ 6*9=42

28th April 2005, 04:17 PM	#834
LostAngeles Anti-WM Jihadist Join Date: May 2004 Location: Having a cup of tea. Posts: 10,159	Re: Re: Please respond regarding email of proposal Quote: Originally posted by Wellfed Everything in the body of my exhibit is what the body of my emailing to Kramer consisted of. I used the "Post subject:" line in the JREF Forum system to emulate the content of the subject line in the correspondence under question. Perhaps you didn't see my exhibit. It is located immediately below my post to you stating "You can not be serious. Where is the rest of my text?" All I see is someone who was certain he had a million bucks but then waffled and whined his way into a rejection. I'd snark some more, but Darat's enforcing the civility rule, it seems.
	__________________ "There is also a likelihood that the settlement will fall between two biomes, potentially hazardous if the player expects a peaceful oceanside meadow, without realizing the ocean is full of amphibious zombie whales." - Dwarf Fortress Wik

28th April 2005, 04:17 PM	#835
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,278	Quote: Originally posted by LostAngeles The GSIC apparently works on DVDs...too Can it make Adam Sandler movies funny?
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.