The Foreigner

[JackIsBack]

This is way off topic... don't know where to put it.

I wish we could get "theforeigner" on here from OPORD (Farmer's) site on here. She (based on her avatar) was so good at digging and doing research and I miss her on there since she disagreed with him on something (the watch) and he banned her (IMO - she was right) .... I'm so happy the Marlene got this site back up and running because IMO some disagreement makes for healthy debate and since her ban, I've been on there only sparingly and since SII came back... not at all.

Anyhow... I was just wondering if anyone knew how to contact her so we could invite her here... thoughts?

[marlene]

isn't "the foreigner" skov?

she is certainly welcome here, but I no longer have any contact info for her, so can't personally invite her.

Jamie Fear is another one who frequently gets banned from forums. I think she probably holds the record.

she's welcome, too, but I don't have any contact info for her, either.

Even IKLP is welcome. In fact, I'd like to hear more from IKLP. I did an extensive literary study of IKLP's posts, comparing the literal and the symbolic, and there's internal consistency. But that may only mean that IKLP is good at story writing. The poetry sucked, however. So, I hope if he/she comes on, he/she spares us and sticks to prose.

Wearing a Halo posted a comment on the PWC blog that he looked forward to this forum re-opening, but he hasn't joined yet, unless he's on under another username.

but what was the dispute about the watch on OPORD? Come on, out with the gossip . . .

[JackIsBack]

but what was the dispute about the watch on OPORD? Come on, out with the gossip . . .

Well.... it was about the cab driver's watch in the Zodiac killing.... Farmer used the time in one of his decodings claiming that the Zodiac set the watch to the time when JFK died. Foreigner claimed that the watch was just doing what a good Timex does and keeping time and that the time was about four minutes off of the JFK time and also was just representing the time the photos were taken - she produced another photo of the watch with another time on the dial - proving her point.... and then *poof* all her posts related to the watch (and mine) were gone and her membership removed... I so desperately wanted to call him on it, because I think if you weren't online at the time, you'd have no clue as to what happened.

My problem is this.... just because there is debate.... it doesn't mean anything and I find it only makes your argument better, your debating skills better, and leads to better conclusions. I run forums too... and I (like you Marlene) want people to debate me, to call me on things, so I can better my evidence and arguments. Can you imagine if we could just ban Rick Distaso from the trial because he was against our view and our theory, because we could not or did not want to debate him.... the problem is that we need to debate him and we need to convince others he is WRONG.... and the best way to do that is to test out our arguments and evidence on people that disagree with us and to see who third party readers ("the jury") side with and believe - if it's not us, we need to hone our arguments and come up with better evidence. I mean... you get it Marlene where many admins don't.

[marlene]

debate is very healthy, and more likely to produce correct results than just discussing it among those that agree with you.

I don't think Farmer wants debate, I think he wants followers, disciples, worshippers.

[introspectre]

isn't "the foreigner" skov?

she is certainly welcome here, but I no longer have any contact info for her, so can't personally invite her.

Jamie Fear is another one who frequently gets banned from forums. I think she probably holds the record.

she's welcome, too, but I don't have any contact info for her, either.

Even IKLP is welcome. In fact, I'd like to hear more from IKLP. I did an extensive literary study of IKLP's posts, comparing the literal and the symbolic, and there's internal consistency. But that may only mean that IKLP is good at story writing. The poetry sucked, however. So, I hope if he/she comes on, he/she spares us and sticks to prose.

Wearing a Halo posted a comment on the PWC blog that he looked forward to this forum re-opening, but he hasn't joined yet, unless he's on under another username.

but what was the dispute about the watch on OPORD? Come on, out with the gossip . . .

Yes, theforeigner is Skov. As for Wearing A Halo, I guess I should give him a holler and say, 'what's up?'

[marlene]

yes, please do give WAH a holler. I'd like to know his opinion on why the Civil Trial was dismissed. Or maybe Loretta Dillon has heard something from one of her sources. Is WAH still tight with Loretta?

[introspectre]

yes, please do give WAH a holler. I'd like to know his opinion on why the Civil Trial was dismissed. Or maybe Loretta Dillon has heard something from one of her sources. Is WAH still tight with Loretta?

Since when has WAH been "tight with Loretta"???

[marlene]

yes, please do give WAH a holler. I'd like to know his opinion on why the Civil Trial was dismissed. Or maybe Loretta Dillon has heard something from one of her sources. Is WAH still tight with Loretta?

Since when has WAH been "tight with Loretta"???

I thought they were in pretty firm agreement on what went down in the Laci case (the 2-trip theory), but maybe I have him mistaken for someone else. Maybe WAH can come on board and define his complete theory on what went down -- does he agree with the State's case, with Loretta, or have a theory all his own?

[introspectre]

yes, please do give WAH a holler. I'd like to know his opinion on why the Civil Trial was dismissed. Or maybe Loretta Dillon has heard something from one of her sources. Is WAH still tight with Loretta?

Since when has WAH been "tight with Loretta"???

I thought they were in pretty firm agreement on what went down in the Laci case (the 2-trip theory), but maybe I have him mistaken for someone else. Maybe WAH can come on board and define his complete theory on what went down -- does he agree with the State's case, with Loretta, or have a theory all his own?

Yep, you do have him mistaken for someone else. LOL

[marlene]

yes, please do give WAH a holler. I'd like to know his opinion on why the Civil Trial was dismissed. Or maybe Loretta Dillon has heard something from one of her sources. Is WAH still tight with Loretta?

Since when has WAH been "tight with Loretta"???

I thought they were in pretty firm agreement on what went down in the Laci case (the 2-trip theory), but maybe I have him mistaken for someone else. Maybe WAH can come on board and define his complete theory on what went down -- does he agree with the State's case, with Loretta, or have a theory all his own?

Yep, you do have him mistaken for someone else. LOL

people on the forums have so many different identities, it's hard to keep them all straight. I sometimes wonder if they don't confuse themselves.

so WAH doesn't believe the 2-trip theory. Then does he believe the State's theory? Or does he have a different theory altogether? It's hard to tell what he thinks when his sole interaction with me is "hit and run."