[ ARC forum 2 ]

Re: Ultimate speculation . . .

Written by Rood at 28 Jul 2002 15:21:11:

As an answer to: Ultimate speculation . . . written by Paul B. at 28 Jul 2002 14:27:31:

If you are not a Doctor...you sure's hell know more than any Doctor that I have ever met. And when Doctors ask me...about circumcision and the foreskin...I tell them to go to you, as the authority. Your postings should be collected to make it easier for them, however. Or, perhaps a book? What say?


Paul are you a doctor?
>Hello Ted.
>As I have posted before (and not just the once), you really can't believe most, if any claims made on the Internet.
>So what do you do? Well, you have to use your own "common-sense" to judge what you read. If you are reading a web-page, you determine whether this is a page hosted by a reputable body or is it perhaps a "free" and anonymous page on Geocities, Yahoo or such? In either case, you look at the autobiography of the author, and see what you can make of it, possibly comparing it with other Web pages concerning him/ her, some of which may themselves fairly authoritative.
>And then, you look at the content - what they have to say, and decide whether it makes sense to you. You have to put all of these things together to get an idea of firstly, how accurate and sensible whatever claims are made, are, and secondly, whether they are useful you your own situation.
>Now of course, this is a totally un-moderated forum (well I think it is - it is relatively spam-free, which suggests either that it is covertly moderated - and if so, very well, or scores so low on the search engines that spammers are not interested in it!), so how can you make anything at all of who people are, and how plausible are their claims?
>Well, you have to look back and read the posts so that you "get to know" the posters. Now of course, people can "spoof" - they have done so to myself and Jim in particular, and "AJ" was complaining of something a while back, but I think that was that someone had caught his e-mail address and sent it to the porno spammers - not nice, but as it was pointed out, it was probably a "robot" that picked up his particular (apparent) interests from a message he put his e-mail address on.
>Incidentally, the reason I have given up posting an e-mail address is that my (email) one is somewhat "broken" - to access it, I have to find and fire up a machine with a browser that won't crash on the java-crud that site contains! I just don't do it that often, so I am really slow to answer mail there.
>In any case, if someone is "spoofed", he (too few ladies here) usually replies accordingly, and it is pretty obvious what is in character and what is not.
>So in regard to your question - the best answer is that I invite you - to read back through a fair bit of what I have posted - and tell me - what do you think?


Answers: