wrote in message
oups.com...

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

Starbuck wrote:
I would have to agree, I don't believe I have seen any one use the
expression or the punctuation in rec.boats before, but it might be
common
in
certain parts of the country or forums.


JimH claims he uses it here all the time.

Really? When did I say I use it "all the time" Chuck.

This is very interesting. When you are cornered you result to spinning
what
folks say. It happened here. It happens most often.


I was characterizing your statement, (in which you actually said that
posting in that fasion "has been a trait of mine for a while"). Notice
the lack of quotes around the three words you object to so strongly?
You're getting all Bill Clinton here. Next we'll be defining "is". But
no, you didn't say that you posted like that using the exact words "all
the time", but you did say it had been a "trait (of yours) for a
while." (Jeez Loueeze....talk about a spin........)

No substantive difference between my characterication of your statement
and your exact quote. Why would you claim there is? Hoping to deflect a
bit of scrutiny, perhaps? In either case, you eagerly associated
yourself with the very unusual style described. Good thing you're not a
defense attorney. :-)

I've only seen you post that way very very recently; if it has been a
"trait, for a while" I should be paying more attention. I haven't
noticed.

Anyway, no apology for you until Sunday PM at the earliest. Off on the
boat for an early fall overnight cruise in the morning. If I become
convinced I am wrong in my assumption, I will apologize. So far, not
convinced. Nothing to apologize for. That yellow hat, red vest, green
shoes and cigar will screw you up every time.




So when are you going to apologize to me Chuck?

Are you man enough to do that or are you going to continues with your
lies?

Funny comment from a guy who is one of the few proven liars in the
group.
("That old ad did have my address and phone number, I edited them out
early this morning"). Just because you finally confessed and apologized
for that whopper that doesn't give you license to call "liar" when
somebody makes a general statement (saying that you claim to post that
way all the time and the microscopically correct and exact quote turns
out to be a statement that it had "been a trait for a while.") Yeah,
your "edited the ad" story was a small lie, but having told it sort of
knocks the legs out from under your high liar-hunting horse, doesn't
it?


You will be proven to be a liar on this when the dust settles. And it will
also be a whopper Chuck.

In the mean time, please explain:

Skippers IP address is: 68.102.254.136

Using http://www.geobytes.com/IpLocator.htm the address shows the user is
located in Derby, Kansas. The old Skipper lived in Derby, Kansas.

The service is cox.net. Cox.net does not provide service in Avon Lake,
Ohio, nor does it in any of the suburbs surrounding Avon Lake.

Skipper posted in the "Delay has been charged" thread on 9-28 at 4:10 pm.

I posted in that thread on 9-28 at 4:14 pm.

I am sure you can further search the NG to find me posting during/near the
times Skipper posted

Please explain. Then offer an apology for your whopper of a lie.

JimH,
This is the reason I don't believe you are Skipper, but if Chuck does, so be
it. No big deal. He has a valid reason to suspect you, but even if he
doesn't, it is no big deal. I wouldn't worry about it, remember rec.boats
is supposed to be fun. ; )


"*JimH*" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
oups.com...

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

Starbuck wrote:
I would have to agree, I don't believe I have seen any one use the
expression or the punctuation in rec.boats before, but it might be
common
in
certain parts of the country or forums.


JimH claims he uses it here all the time.

Really? When did I say I use it "all the time" Chuck.

This is very interesting. When you are cornered you result to spinning
what
folks say. It happened here. It happens most often.


I was characterizing your statement, (in which you actually said that
posting in that fasion "has been a trait of mine for a while"). Notice
the lack of quotes around the three words you object to so strongly?
You're getting all Bill Clinton here. Next we'll be defining "is". But
no, you didn't say that you posted like that using the exact words "all
the time", but you did say it had been a "trait (of yours) for a
while." (Jeez Loueeze....talk about a spin........)

No substantive difference between my characterication of your statement
and your exact quote. Why would you claim there is? Hoping to deflect a
bit of scrutiny, perhaps? In either case, you eagerly associated
yourself with the very unusual style described. Good thing you're not a
defense attorney. :-)

I've only seen you post that way very very recently; if it has been a
"trait, for a while" I should be paying more attention. I haven't
noticed.

Anyway, no apology for you until Sunday PM at the earliest. Off on the
boat for an early fall overnight cruise in the morning. If I become
convinced I am wrong in my assumption, I will apologize. So far, not
convinced. Nothing to apologize for. That yellow hat, red vest, green
shoes and cigar will screw you up every time.




So when are you going to apologize to me Chuck?

Are you man enough to do that or are you going to continues with your
lies?

Funny comment from a guy who is one of the few proven liars in the
group.
("That old ad did have my address and phone number, I edited them out
early this morning"). Just because you finally confessed and apologized
for that whopper that doesn't give you license to call "liar" when
somebody makes a general statement (saying that you claim to post that
way all the time and the microscopically correct and exact quote turns
out to be a statement that it had "been a trait for a while.") Yeah,
your "edited the ad" story was a small lie, but having told it sort of
knocks the legs out from under your high liar-hunting horse, doesn't
it?


You will be proven to be a liar on this when the dust settles. And it
will also be a whopper Chuck.

In the mean time, please explain:

Skippers IP address is: 68.102.254.136

Using http://www.geobytes.com/IpLocator.htm the address shows the user is
located in Derby, Kansas. The old Skipper lived in Derby, Kansas.

The service is cox.net. Cox.net does not provide service in Avon Lake,
Ohio, nor does it in any of the suburbs surrounding Avon Lake.

Skipper posted in the "Delay has been charged" thread on 9-28 at 4:10 pm.

I posted in that thread on 9-28 at 4:14 pm.

I am sure you can further search the NG to find me posting during/near the
times Skipper posted

Please explain. Then offer an apology for your whopper of a lie.

Are you are saying that you are 'middle of the road' politically and
represent the majority of views/opinions of US citizens Chuck?


BTW: How are you working on that apology you owe me? ;-)

Maybe when you apologize for your lies. Remember?

What do you have to apologize for? After all, you never post lies now
do you, Caesar-boy?

On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 12:31:39 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 08:13:37 -0400, PocoLoco
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 12:08:51 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 07:48:48 -0400, PocoLoco
wrote:

On 30 Sep 2005 19:47:48 -0700, wrote:


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On 30 Sep 2005 18:12:35 -0700, wrote:

Stereotypes facilitate binary thinking because, with a stereotype,
entire groups of people can be reduced to a single factor subject to a
preexisting conclusion. When you reduce your question to two single
factors, you have a binary proposition.

Not really.

Mathematically, in particular when building a truth table, any number
of inputs always resolve to two states - 1 and 0 (yes/no, true/false).
This is true for any number system actually no matter how it is
expressed. But I digress.

There are varying decision states in truth tables, but they still
resolve to 1 or 0.

In fact, if you combine varying states of NOT, OR, AND, NOR, NAND and
EOR and resolve their states, you always end up with either 1 or 0.

This is true for any given number of inputs.

So, in effect, almost all decisions, if proper rules of logic are
applied, are binary - yes/no, true/false.

Can't be any other way.


Only when probable results are considered. Many decisions require moral
judgment and evaluation and in some cases will transcend the bounds of
objectivity or logic.

Example?

Judgement and evaluation are part of the decision making process, but they are
not the decision.

Not really.

Judgment and evaluation are emotive states and not relevant.

Only facts can resolve true/false statements.

We disagree. Evaluating alternatives is part of the process. We use facts to
evaluate alternatives.

There are no "alternatives". Once you start searching for
alternatives, then the process of discovering the truth is corrupted.

How are you equating decision making with 'discovering the truth'?
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 12:34:41 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 08:15:17 -0400, PocoLoco
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 12:06:45 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On 30 Sep 2005 19:47:48 -0700, wrote:


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On 30 Sep 2005 18:12:35 -0700, wrote:

Stereotypes facilitate binary thinking because, with a stereotype,
entire groups of people can be reduced to a single factor subject to a
preexisting conclusion. When you reduce your question to two single
factors, you have a binary proposition.

Not really.

Mathematically, in particular when building a truth table, any number
of inputs always resolve to two states - 1 and 0 (yes/no, true/false).
This is true for any number system actually no matter how it is
expressed. But I digress.

There are varying decision states in truth tables, but they still
resolve to 1 or 0.

In fact, if you combine varying states of NOT, OR, AND, NOR, NAND and
EOR and resolve their states, you always end up with either 1 or 0.

This is true for any given number of inputs.

So, in effect, almost all decisions, if proper rules of logic are
applied, are binary - yes/no, true/false.

Can't be any other way.

Only when probable results are considered. Many decisions require moral
judgment and evaluation and in some cases will transcend the bounds of
objectivity or logic.

Nothing transcends the bounds of objectivity or logic chains -
everything is either true or false - even in quantum states which is
as close as you can get to a real metaphysical concept that actually
works in the real world.

Moral judgments are entirely subjective, but they can still be
resolved into true/false statements - 1s and 0s if you examine the
logic chain properly. I'll be the first to admit it is difficult, but
still possible.

There can be only one true and one false - no inbetween no matter how
many different states of logic are used to process the answer.

Be careful, you're stepping on the toes of a lot of liberals who claim
conservatives are 'binary thinkers' and therefore bad.

I would posit that any individual who denies that binary states are
the basis for all thought, left or right, is ignorant.

Yes, you could.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 12:34:41 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 08:15:17 -0400, PocoLoco
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 12:06:45 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On 30 Sep 2005 19:47:48 -0700, wrote:


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On 30 Sep 2005 18:12:35 -0700, wrote:

Stereotypes facilitate binary thinking because, with a stereotype,
entire groups of people can be reduced to a single factor subject to a
preexisting conclusion. When you reduce your question to two single
factors, you have a binary proposition.

Not really.

Mathematically, in particular when building a truth table, any number
of inputs always resolve to two states - 1 and 0 (yes/no, true/false).
This is true for any number system actually no matter how it is
expressed. But I digress.

There are varying decision states in truth tables, but they still
resolve to 1 or 0.

In fact, if you combine varying states of NOT, OR, AND, NOR, NAND and
EOR and resolve their states, you always end up with either 1 or 0.

This is true for any given number of inputs.

So, in effect, almost all decisions, if proper rules of logic are
applied, are binary - yes/no, true/false.

Can't be any other way.

Only when probable results are considered. Many decisions require moral
judgment and evaluation and in some cases will transcend the bounds of
objectivity or logic.

Nothing transcends the bounds of objectivity or logic chains -
everything is either true or false - even in quantum states which is
as close as you can get to a real metaphysical concept that actually
works in the real world.

Moral judgments are entirely subjective, but they can still be
resolved into true/false statements - 1s and 0s if you examine the
logic chain properly. I'll be the first to admit it is difficult, but
still possible.

There can be only one true and one false - no inbetween no matter how
many different states of logic are used to process the answer.

Be careful, you're stepping on the toes of a lot of liberals who claim
conservatives are 'binary thinkers' and therefore bad.

I would posit that any individual who denies that binary states are
the basis for all thought, left or right, is ignorant.

Whoops! I misread 'would' for 'could'.

Do you think you could get some of the liberals to admit that, in reality, they
*are* binary thinkers after all?

Remember, 'binary thinker' is one of the names many liberals love to call
conservatives. They believe it's derogatory.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

Starbuck wrote:
JimH,
This is the reason I don't believe you are Skipper, but if Chuck does, so be
it. No big deal. He has a valid reason to suspect you, but even if he
doesn't, it is no big deal. I wouldn't worry about it, remember rec.boats
is supposed to be fun. ; )


Gee Starbuck...you sound like you belong on Oprah!

On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 13:31:50 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 09:06:17 -0400, PocoLoco
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 12:31:39 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 08:13:37 -0400, PocoLoco
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 12:08:51 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Oct 2005 07:48:48 -0400, PocoLoco
wrote:

On 30 Sep 2005 19:47:48 -0700, wrote:


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On 30 Sep 2005 18:12:35 -0700, wrote:

Stereotypes facilitate binary thinking because, with a stereotype,
entire groups of people can be reduced to a single factor subject to a
preexisting conclusion. When you reduce your question to two single
factors, you have a binary proposition.

Not really.

Mathematically, in particular when building a truth table, any number
of inputs always resolve to two states - 1 and 0 (yes/no, true/false).
This is true for any number system actually no matter how it is
expressed. But I digress.

There are varying decision states in truth tables, but they still
resolve to 1 or 0.

In fact, if you combine varying states of NOT, OR, AND, NOR, NAND and
EOR and resolve their states, you always end up with either 1 or 0.

This is true for any given number of inputs.

So, in effect, almost all decisions, if proper rules of logic are
applied, are binary - yes/no, true/false.

Can't be any other way.


Only when probable results are considered. Many decisions require moral
judgment and evaluation and in some cases will transcend the bounds of
objectivity or logic.

Example?

Judgement and evaluation are part of the decision making process, but they are
not the decision.

Not really.

Judgment and evaluation are emotive states and not relevant.

Only facts can resolve true/false statements.

We disagree. Evaluating alternatives is part of the process. We use facts to
evaluate alternatives.

There are no "alternatives". Once you start searching for
alternatives, then the process of discovering the truth is corrupted.

How are you equating decision making with 'discovering the truth'?

You can only have a true decision based on logic.

Any alternative decision is by definition false.

(Can you tell I'm really bored this morning?) :)

Yes.

I think you're confusing the decision (the process of deciding) with the outcome
of the decision, either A or B (1 or 0). Or maybe I am.

One could choose A regardless of the logic leading to the decision. My wife does
that all the time.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

That is because I am an overweight black woman worth billions of dollars.


"Don White" wrote in message
...
Starbuck wrote:
JimH,
This is the reason I don't believe you are Skipper, but if Chuck does, so
be it. No big deal. He has a valid reason to suspect you, but even if
he doesn't, it is no big deal. I wouldn't worry about it, remember
rec.boats is supposed to be fun. ; )


Gee Starbuck...you sound like you belong on Oprah!