Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#682
|
|||
|
|||
On 9/28/05 8:14 PM, in article , "Clyde Slick"
wrote: "SSJVCmag" wrote in message ... This is just the most remarkable thing, there's a whacky net-wormhole that's independantly reposting normal single-RAO postings onto other newsgroups. Interesting stuff. Does this happen only to your posts, or does it happen to the posts of others on RAO? Not sure, what have you seen elsewhere? |
#683
|
|||
|
|||
On 9/28/05 8:18 PM, in article , "Clyde Slick"
wrote: "SSJVCmag" wrote in message ... Yeah, but I learn best through example, show me how one AVOIDS places where one's not appreciated and I'll gleefully follow!) I just did, DUMMY, by "not" posting nineteen (19) identical repetitive messages to RAO. They weren't identical, the person that went to some effort and reposted those RAO posts into other newsgroups seemed to have forgotten to add a response and moved them out of place, they needed to be seen here where they originated so the mistake could be corrected here. |
#684
|
|||
|
|||
On 9/28/05 8:19 PM, in article , "Clyde Slick"
wrote: "SSJVCmag" wrote in message ... On 9/28/05 1:52 PM, in article , "Sander deWaal" wrote: To *really* understand the ins and outs of RAO, one should have been here a loooong time. One has to ENJOY inventing and reveling in spoiled 4th-grader fartfests to do that. I just ain;t got the time OR inclination. you need to tell us that eighteen (18) more times. Well, no, SOMEBODY here thought it needed to be reitterated but failed to point out why and placed them in an unrelated newsgroup. I figured if they were back here they could address that. |
#685
|
|||
|
|||
On 9/28/05 8:21 PM, in article , "Clyde Slick"
wrote: "SSJVCmag" wrote in message ... On 9/28/05 2:57 PM, in article , "dave weil" wrote: On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 15:35:07 GMT, SSJVCmag wrote: On 9/28/05 10:25 AM, in article , "dave weil" wrote: Oh yeah, RAO thanks you for the anti-social flood you instigated this morning. This refers to...? ...the NINETEEN posts from you this morning between 8:48 and 9:02. Ahhh, those would be the ones exclusively in response to whomever here thought it good to, earlier than that, post those singular RAO posts to other newsgroups with sole intent to annoy others outright, right? Figure out who did it, and complain to him/her, privately. Got the email address handy? They seem to be faking theirs. |
#686
|
|||
|
|||
On 9/28/05 8:21 PM, in article , "Clyde Slick"
wrote: "SSJVCmag" wrote in message This refers to...? ...the NINETEEN posts from you this morning between 8:48 and 9:02. Ahhh, those would be the ones exclusively in response to whomever here thought it good to, earlier than that, post those singular RAO posts to other newsgroups with sole intent to annoy others outright, right? The next thing you know, you'll be accusing all of us of sending you kiddie porn pictures. We really don;t want to go there, now, do we... |
#687
|
|||
|
|||
"SSJVCmag" wrote in message ... On 9/28/05 8:14 PM, in article , "Clyde Slick" wrote: "SSJVCmag" wrote in message ... This is just the most remarkable thing, there's a whacky net-wormhole that's independantly reposting normal single-RAO postings onto other newsgroups. Interesting stuff. Does this happen only to your posts, or does it happen to the posts of others on RAO? Not sure, what have you seen elsewhere? |
#688
|
|||
|
|||
"SSJVCmag" wrote in message ... On 9/28/05 8:14 PM, in article , "Clyde Slick" wrote: "SSJVCmag" wrote in message ... This is just the most remarkable thing, there's a whacky net-wormhole that's independantly reposting normal single-RAO postings onto other newsgroups. Interesting stuff. Does this happen only to your posts, or does it happen to the posts of others on RAO? Not sure, what have you seen elsewhere? I don't look elsewhere, that's why I asked. |
#689
|
|||
|
|||
"SSJVCmag" wrote in message ... On 9/28/05 8:18 PM, in article , "Clyde Slick" wrote: "SSJVCmag" wrote in message ... Yeah, but I learn best through example, show me how one AVOIDS places where one's not appreciated and I'll gleefully follow!) I just did, DUMMY, by "not" posting nineteen (19) identical repetitive messages to RAO. They weren't identical, the person that went to some effort and reposted those RAO posts into other newsgroups seemed to have forgotten to add a response and moved them out of place, they needed to be seen here where they originated so the mistake could be corrected here. You're know at the point where I feel very secure in labeling you as a sociopath. |
#690
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 05:38:23 GMT, SSJVCmag
wrote: I guess in your world, two wrongs DO make a right, and your case, it's magnified because it's coming from the same person within the span of minutes. I really am missing what you're driving at here. First what are these 'two wrongs' that you seem to see... The only real 'wrong' here seems to be that of you guys forcing RAO threads onto other newsgroups unbidden using faked sender and return addresses. \And the second wrong is replying to everyone of those posts with sanctimonious drivel. Second, What 'same person' posts are you referring to? All of your posts of course. Since you're being deliberately obtuse at this point, and you have displayed your ignorance for all to see, I"ll take my leave from you now. |
#691
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 22:58:31 GMT, "
wrote: Right after WW2 the US arguably had a national obsession with WW2. As a nation we mulled it over again and again. We had movies about it, TV shows about it, magazine articles about it, books about it, and even a president or two (Eisenhower and Kennedy) about it. Imagine that. Simply because it was the biggest threat to freedom in the world up until that time and a magnificent stand with an uncertain outcome by the free people of the world. Obsessed? Shame on us! Then why were so many people against joining in the war? Until Pearl Harbor, and after there was a very large anti-war contingent. It wasn't perceived as a threat to America until Pearl Harbour. Though happy to accept refugees from Hitler's oppression, even the Jewish lobby didn't seem to see any reason to go over there and stop it happening. Though, of course rescuing Europe in WW2 was used as leverage towards the creation of Israel, a promise made by the Balfour declaration of 1917, but conveniently forgotten. Compare the current "concern" for the well-being of the Iraqi population. International politics is not a clean game. |
#692
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 17:14:38 +0200, Chel van Gennip
wrote: Just for the record, in 1917 Balfour promissed several things as a package deal, the declaration reads: "His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country." Indeed. And, as it was patently impossible to give land to Israel without taking it away from someone else, the third clause provides a get-out. Nice one, Arthur :-) |
#693
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.misc,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Julian Hirsch "I don't really have a replacement career,"Morein said. "It's a very gnawing thing."
In article , "Robert Morein"
wrote: He was not a charasmatic person, though I can provide one personal anecdote. It happens we took the same New Jersey Transit train. One morning, we got off together. I saw a man of such stunning radiance that I picked him out of a crowd of a hundred people This anecdote resulted in a visit from the police after Hirsch complained that my son was stalking him, it wasn't happenstance at all. Sadly, it wasn't the first time, and hasn't been the last, either. Unfortunately, Bob can NEVER admit he's been beaten, or he's wrong. He spent 12 years in college trying to write a thesis that was totally without any scientific merit. When Drexel got tired of his bleating about not giving him a degree, he sued them. And even after he was proven IN COURT to have been wrong, he insisted on appealing to the Supreme Court in Washington. And then he criticized THE SUPREME COURT and HIS OWN LAWYER for "erroneous legal reasoning"! He then wanted ME to fund a lawsuit against his LAWYER! So you're not going to change him, god knows his mother tried and it killed her. Dr. Sylvan Morein, DDS PROVEN PUBLISHED FACTS about my Son, Robert Morein -- Bob Morein History -- http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/l...ws/4853918.htm Doctoral student takes intellectual property case to Supreme Court By L. STUART DITZEN Philadelphia Inquirer PHILADELPHIA -Even the professors who dismissed him from a doctoral program at Drexel University agreed that Robert Morein was uncommonly smart. They apparently didn't realize that he was uncommonly stubborn too - so much so that he would mount a court fight all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court to challenge his dismissal. The Supremes have already rejected this appeal, btw. "It's a personality trait I have - I'm a tenacious guy," said Morein, a pleasantly eccentric man regarded by friends as an inventive genius. "And we do come to a larger issue here." An "inventive genius" that has never invented anything. And hardly "pleasantly" eccentric. A five-year legal battle between this unusual ex-student and one of Philadelphia's premier educational institutions has gone largely unnoticed by the media and the public. Because no one gives a **** about a 50 year old loser. But it has been the subject of much attention in academia. Drexel says it dismissed Morein in 1995 because he failed, after eight years, to complete a thesis required for a doctorate in electrical and computer engineering. Not to mention the 12 years it took him to get thru high school! BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Morein, 50, of Dresher, Pa., contends that he was dismissed only after his thesis adviser "appropriated" an innovative idea Morein had developed in a rarefied area of thought called "estimation theory" and arranged to have it patented. A contention rejected by three courts. From a 50 YEAR OLD that has done NOTHING PRODUCTIVE with his life. In February 2000, Philadelphia Common Pleas Court Judge Esther R. Sylvester ruled that Morein's adviser indeed had taken his idea. An idea that was worth nothing, because it didn't work. Just like Robert Morein, who has never worked a day in his life. Sylvester held that Morein had been unjustly dismissed and she ordered Drexel to reinstate him or refund his tuition. Funnily enough, Drexel AGREED to reinstate Morein, who rejected the offer because he knew he was and IS a failed loser. Spending daddy's money to cover up his lack of productivity. That brought roars of protest from the lions of academia. There is a long tradition in America of noninterference by the courts in academic decisions. Backed by every major university in Pennsylvania and organizations representing thousands of others around the country, Drexel appealed to the state Superior Court. The appellate court, by a 2-1 vote, reversed Sylvester in June 2001 and restored the status quo. Morein was, once again, out at Drexel. And the time-honored axiom that courts ought to keep their noses out of academic affairs was reasserted. The state Supreme Court declined to review the case and, in an ordinary litigation, that would have been the end of it. But Morein, in a quixotic gesture that goes steeply against the odds, has asked the highest court in the land to give him a hearing. Daddy throws more money down the crapper. His attorney, Faye Riva Cohen, said the Supreme Court appeal is important even if it fails because it raises the issue of whether a university has a right to lay claim to a student's ideas - or intellectual property - without compensation. "Any time you are in a Ph.D. program, you are a serf, you are a slave," said Cohen. Morein "is concerned not only for himself. He feels that what happened to him is pretty common." It's called HIGHER EDUCATION, honey. The students aren't in charge, the UNIVERSITY and PROFESSORS are. Drexel's attorney, Neil J. Hamburg, called Morein's appeal - and his claim that his idea was stolen - "preposterous." "I will eat my shoe if the Supreme Court hears this case," declared Hamburg. "We're not even going to file a response. He is a brilliant guy, but his intelligence should be used for the advancement of society rather than pursuing self-destructive litigation." No **** sherlock. The litigation began in 1997, when Morein sued Drexel claiming that a committee of professors had dumped him after he accused his faculty adviser, Paul Kalata, of appropriating his idea. His concept was considered to have potential value for businesses in minutely measuring the internal functions of machines, industrial processes and electronic systems. The field of "estimation theory" is one in which scientists attempt to calculate what they cannot plainly observe, such as the inside workings of a nuclear plant or a computer. My estimation theory? There is NO brain at work inside the head of Robert Morein, only sawdust. Prior to Morein's dismissal, Drexel looked into his complaint against Kalata and concluded that the associate professor had done nothing wrong. Kalata, through a university lawyer, declined to comment. At a nonjury trial before Sylvester in 1999, Morein testified that Kalata in 1990 had posed a technical problem for him to study for his thesis. It related to estimation theory. Kalata, who did not appear at the trial, said in a 1998 deposition that a Cherry Hill company for which he was a paid consultant, K-Tron International, had asked him to develop an alternate estimation method for it. The company manufactures bulk material feeders and conveyors used in industrial processes. Morein testified that, after much study, he experienced "a flash of inspiration" and came up with a novel mathematical concept to address the problem Kalata had presented. Without his knowledge, Morein said, Kalata shared the idea with K-Tron. K-Tron then applied for a patent, listing Kalata and Morein as co-inventors. Morein said he agreed "under duress" to the arrangement, but felt "locked into a highly disadvantageous situation." As a result, he testified, he became alienated from Kalata. As events unfolded, Kalata signed over his interest in the patent to K-Tron. The company never capitalized on the technology and eventually allowed the patent to lapse. No one made any money from it. Because it was bogus. Even Kalata was mortified that he was a victim of this SCAMSTER, Robert Morein. In 1991, Morein went to the head of Drexel's electrical engineering department, accused Kalata of appropriating his intellectual property, and asked for a new faculty adviser. The staff at Drexel laughed wildly at the ignorance of Robert Morein. He didn't get one. Instead, a committee of four professors, including Kalata, was formed to oversee Morein's thesis work. Four years later, the committee dismissed him, saying he had failed to complete his thesis. So Morein ****s up his first couple years, gets new faculty advisers (a TEAM), and then ****s up again! Brilliant! Morein claimed that the committee intentionally had undermined him. Morein makes LOTS of claims that are nonsense. One look thru the usenet proves it. Judge Sylvester agreed. In her ruling, Sylvester wrote: "It is this court's opinion that the defendants were motivated by bad faith and ill will." So much for political machine judges. The U.S. Supreme Court receives 7,000 appeals a year and agrees to hear only about 100 of them. Hamburg, Drexel's attorney, is betting the high court will reject Morein's appeal out of hand because its focal point - concerning a student's right to intellectual property - was not central to the litigation in the Pennsylvania courts. Morein said he understands it's a long shot, but he feels he must pursue it. Failure. Look it up in Websters. You'll see a picture of Robert Morein. The poster boy for SCAMMING LOSERS. "I had to seek closure," he said. Without a doctorate, he said, he has been unable to pursue a career he had hoped would lead him into research on artificial intelligence. Who better to tell us about "artificial intelligence". BWAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! As it is, Morein lives at home with his father and makes a modest income from stock investments. He has written a film script that he is trying to make into a movie. And in the basement of his father's home he is working on an invention, an industrial pump so powerful it could cut steel with a bulletlike stream of water. FAILED STUDENT FAILED MOVIE MAKER FAILED SCREENWRITER FAILED INVESTOR FAILED DRIVER FAILED SON FAILED PARENTS FAILED INVENTOR FAILED PLAINTIFF FAILED HOMOSEXUAL FAILED HUMAN FAILED FAILED But none of it is what he had imagined for himself. "I don't really have a replacement career," Morein said. "It's a very gnawing thing." |
#694
Posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.tech,rec.audio.misc,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Julian Hirsch "I don't really have a replacement career,"Morein said. "It's a very gnawing thing."
In article , "Robert Morein"
wrote: He was not a charasmatic person, though I can provide one personal anecdote. It happens we took the same New Jersey Transit train. One morning, we got off together. I saw a man of such stunning radiance that I picked him out of a crowd of a hundred people This anecdote resulted in a visit from the police after Hirsch complained that my son was stalking him, it wasn't happenstance at all. Sadly, it wasn't the first time, and hasn't been the last, either. Unfortunately, Bob can NEVER admit he's been beaten, or he's wrong. He spent 12 years in college trying to write a thesis that was totally without any scientific merit. When Drexel got tired of his bleating about not giving him a degree, he sued them. And even after he was proven IN COURT to have been wrong, he insisted on appealing to the Supreme Court in Washington. And then he criticized THE SUPREME COURT and HIS OWN LAWYER for "erroneous legal reasoning"! He then wanted ME to fund a lawsuit against his LAWYER! So you're not going to change him, god knows his mother tried and it killed her. Dr. Sylvan Morein, DDS PROVEN PUBLISHED FACTS about my Son, Robert Morein -- Bob Morein History -- http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/l...ws/4853918.htm Doctoral student takes intellectual property case to Supreme Court By L. STUART DITZEN Philadelphia Inquirer PHILADELPHIA -Even the professors who dismissed him from a doctoral program at Drexel University agreed that Robert Morein was uncommonly smart. They apparently didn't realize that he was uncommonly stubborn too - so much so that he would mount a court fight all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court to challenge his dismissal. The Supremes have already rejected this appeal, btw. "It's a personality trait I have - I'm a tenacious guy," said Morein, a pleasantly eccentric man regarded by friends as an inventive genius. "And we do come to a larger issue here." An "inventive genius" that has never invented anything. And hardly "pleasantly" eccentric. A five-year legal battle between this unusual ex-student and one of Philadelphia's premier educational institutions has gone largely unnoticed by the media and the public. Because no one gives a **** about a 50 year old loser. But it has been the subject of much attention in academia. Drexel says it dismissed Morein in 1995 because he failed, after eight years, to complete a thesis required for a doctorate in electrical and computer engineering. Not to mention the 12 years it took him to get thru high school! BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Morein, 50, of Dresher, Pa., contends that he was dismissed only after his thesis adviser "appropriated" an innovative idea Morein had developed in a rarefied area of thought called "estimation theory" and arranged to have it patented. A contention rejected by three courts. From a 50 YEAR OLD that has done NOTHING PRODUCTIVE with his life. In February 2000, Philadelphia Common Pleas Court Judge Esther R. Sylvester ruled that Morein's adviser indeed had taken his idea. An idea that was worth nothing, because it didn't work. Just like Robert Morein, who has never worked a day in his life. Sylvester held that Morein had been unjustly dismissed and she ordered Drexel to reinstate him or refund his tuition. Funnily enough, Drexel AGREED to reinstate Morein, who rejected the offer because he knew he was and IS a failed loser. Spending daddy's money to cover up his lack of productivity. That brought roars of protest from the lions of academia. There is a long tradition in America of noninterference by the courts in academic decisions. Backed by every major university in Pennsylvania and organizations representing thousands of others around the country, Drexel appealed to the state Superior Court. The appellate court, by a 2-1 vote, reversed Sylvester in June 2001 and restored the status quo. Morein was, once again, out at Drexel. And the time-honored axiom that courts ought to keep their noses out of academic affairs was reasserted. The state Supreme Court declined to review the case and, in an ordinary litigation, that would have been the end of it. But Morein, in a quixotic gesture that goes steeply against the odds, has asked the highest court in the land to give him a hearing. Daddy throws more money down the crapper. His attorney, Faye Riva Cohen, said the Supreme Court appeal is important even if it fails because it raises the issue of whether a university has a right to lay claim to a student's ideas - or intellectual property - without compensation. "Any time you are in a Ph.D. program, you are a serf, you are a slave," said Cohen. Morein "is concerned not only for himself. He feels that what happened to him is pretty common." It's called HIGHER EDUCATION, honey. The students aren't in charge, the UNIVERSITY and PROFESSORS are. Drexel's attorney, Neil J. Hamburg, called Morein's appeal - and his claim that his idea was stolen - "preposterous." "I will eat my shoe if the Supreme Court hears this case," declared Hamburg. "We're not even going to file a response. He is a brilliant guy, but his intelligence should be used for the advancement of society rather than pursuing self-destructive litigation." No **** sherlock. The litigation began in 1997, when Morein sued Drexel claiming that a committee of professors had dumped him after he accused his faculty adviser, Paul Kalata, of appropriating his idea. His concept was considered to have potential value for businesses in minutely measuring the internal functions of machines, industrial processes and electronic systems. The field of "estimation theory" is one in which scientists attempt to calculate what they cannot plainly observe, such as the inside workings of a nuclear plant or a computer. My estimation theory? There is NO brain at work inside the head of Robert Morein, only sawdust. Prior to Morein's dismissal, Drexel looked into his complaint against Kalata and concluded that the associate professor had done nothing wrong. Kalata, through a university lawyer, declined to comment. At a nonjury trial before Sylvester in 1999, Morein testified that Kalata in 1990 had posed a technical problem for him to study for his thesis. It related to estimation theory. Kalata, who did not appear at the trial, said in a 1998 deposition that a Cherry Hill company for which he was a paid consultant, K-Tron International, had asked him to develop an alternate estimation method for it. The company manufactures bulk material feeders and conveyors used in industrial processes. Morein testified that, after much study, he experienced "a flash of inspiration" and came up with a novel mathematical concept to address the problem Kalata had presented. Without his knowledge, Morein said, Kalata shared the idea with K-Tron. K-Tron then applied for a patent, listing Kalata and Morein as co-inventors. Morein said he agreed "under duress" to the arrangement, but felt "locked into a highly disadvantageous situation." As a result, he testified, he became alienated from Kalata. As events unfolded, Kalata signed over his interest in the patent to K-Tron. The company never capitalized on the technology and eventually allowed the patent to lapse. No one made any money from it. Because it was bogus. Even Kalata was mortified that he was a victim of this SCAMSTER, Robert Morein. In 1991, Morein went to the head of Drexel's electrical engineering department, accused Kalata of appropriating his intellectual property, and asked for a new faculty adviser. The staff at Drexel laughed wildly at the ignorance of Robert Morein. He didn't get one. Instead, a committee of four professors, including Kalata, was formed to oversee Morein's thesis work. Four years later, the committee dismissed him, saying he had failed to complete his thesis. So Morein ****s up his first couple years, gets new faculty advisers (a TEAM), and then ****s up again! Brilliant! Morein claimed that the committee intentionally had undermined him. Morein makes LOTS of claims that are nonsense. One look thru the usenet proves it. Judge Sylvester agreed. In her ruling, Sylvester wrote: "It is this court's opinion that the defendants were motivated by bad faith and ill will." So much for political machine judges. The U.S. Supreme Court receives 7,000 appeals a year and agrees to hear only about 100 of them. Hamburg, Drexel's attorney, is betting the high court will reject Morein's appeal out of hand because its focal point - concerning a student's right to intellectual property - was not central to the litigation in the Pennsylvania courts. Morein said he understands it's a long shot, but he feels he must pursue it. Failure. Look it up in Websters. You'll see a picture of Robert Morein. The poster boy for SCAMMING LOSERS. "I had to seek closure," he said. Without a doctorate, he said, he has been unable to pursue a career he had hoped would lead him into research on artificial intelligence. Who better to tell us about "artificial intelligence". BWAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! As it is, Morein lives at home with his father and makes a modest income from stock investments. He has written a film script that he is trying to make into a movie. And in the basement of his father's home he is working on an invention, an industrial pump so powerful it could cut steel with a bulletlike stream of water. FAILED STUDENT FAILED MOVIE MAKER FAILED SCREENWRITER FAILED INVESTOR FAILED DRIVER FAILED SON FAILED PARENTS FAILED INVENTOR FAILED PLAINTIFF FAILED HOMOSEXUAL FAILED HUMAN FAILED FAILED But none of it is what he had imagined for himself. "I don't really have a replacement career," Morein said. "It's a very gnawing thing." |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
John Atkinson: audio ignoramus or sleazebag? | Audio Opinions | |||
question for anyone who bought an Aardvark product bundled with Cakewalk | Pro Audio | |||
question for anyone who bought an Aardvark product bundled with Cakewalk | Pro Audio | |||
question for anyone who bought an Aardvark product bundled with Cakewalk | Pro Audio | |||
RCA out and Speaker Question in 2004 Ranger Edge Question | Car Audio |