Dave Weil wrote:


On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 11:24:27 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 09:03:06 -0800, "Michael McKelvy"
wrote:

of course. Let's start with all the
ridiculous accusations of "fraud" he's hurled at Dr. Richman.

I said at the time and I still maintain he is either not who he says he
is
or that he is not a psychologist.

What possible proof do you have of this?

Absolutely none, it's an opinion I get to have.

I see. So if a "liberal" states an "unsubtantiated opinion, he gets
slammed, but if you do it, it's "OK" because you get to express an
opinion.

Nice.


Double standards, anyone? Of course, his claims about my professional identity
are not just opinions, they are lies.




He acts like a jerk IMO.


That, however, is an opinion.


So do you? So what's your point?

He doesn't act like any sort of psychologist I've ever read or met.

Maybe you could tell us about your psychologist. Does he or she just
nod while you spout off?


There's been no evidence presented that he's actually ever met one, of course.
It's doubtful, IMO, that he has ever had the motivation to be truthful enough
to benefit from seeing one.



Having some idea of professional conduct, I don't believe he's who he says
he is.
If he is who he says he is then the world is a sadder place because of it
IMO.

I see. You aren't allowed to defend yourself on RAO or get to play
rough and tumble like everyone else because you are a 'professional".
Sounds like dirty pool to me.





Thank you for making a valuable point, Dave. McKelvy has tried for years to
establish one set of rules for himself and another for a person who happens to
be a member of a profession that he wants to smear. More precisely, he's tried
to equate RAO behavior with the behavior expected of a clinical psychologist in
a professional environment. In both cases, he's simply demonstrated his lack
of credibility and inability to treat people fairly.


Bruce J. Richman, Ph.D.
Licensed Psychologist