About Ken [was: Could a cell membrane provide an electromagnetic shield]
targeting at OMCL.mil
Sun Feb 15 07:30:56 EST 2004
On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:53:00 -0500, r norman <rsn_ at _comcast.net>
} Ken, if you are reading -- you are entitled to post your theories.
} But you are entitled to do it just once and then stop. You are
} entitled to respond to other posts and queries. But just once. It
} really is an abuse of news group protocol to answer your own posts and
} do it again and again and again. There are threads where you post
} four, six, even eight, ten or twelve posts in a row. If you have
} something to say, say it once and stop. If you think of more to add
} later, too bad. That means you shouldn't post anything until you have
} thought it through sufficiently.
I respecfully suggest a reconsideration of this. If he restricts his
posting to the relevant threads, no matter how often or apparently
ill-conceived in anyone elses' opinion, it remains isolated from
discourse to which it is irrelevant. Repetative self-response is a
pretty good indicator for even the novice that there's something a bit
As for responding to any question as though it were the nail to the
hammer of his "theory", no, I'm sorry, there are some things that are
just wrong and if his answer is wrong, as he says, he'll stand by it.
If he's allowed to do so, fine, but I'd consider it unconscionable for
anyone who knew better not to correct it so as to make sure the less
knowledgeable were not misled. The student asks, expecting to be
taught. If doing so, by those here most capable, is not the primary
purpose of this group, then in my opinion it doesn't deserve the
bandwidth dedicated to carrying it.
Making him stop is impossible, and wrong. Making him stop being
disruptive is the task. Doing so with the least other disruption now
and in the future should dictate the means. I think keeping his
traffic focused within relevant threads, regardless of amount, to be
the most efficient way to accomplish these.
More information about the Neur-sci