In article <1140818867.930711.236480[at]i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> ,
"The Central Scrutinizer" <bobby_dread[at]hotmail.com> wrote:

- quote -


The simple answer is that Otis will not answer your question. At best,
you will get a "cut and paste" about "prevention at the the threshold".

--
Dan Abel
dabel[at]sonic.net
Petaluma, California, USA

- quote -


No, I expect you're bang on. I'm kind of stumped, then. Seems kind of
absurd that the 'group' would collectively accept a situation like
this, when there's no foreseeable hope of a change in the weather. Yet
there's always so many little 'scraps' going on with him, that the
group suffers.

Neil send out his weekly 'warnings', which (under the circumstances)
seem necessary - but I don't think it's enough.

Personally, and I know it sucks, I think the only 'solution' would be
to take what measures are necessary to turn this into a moderated
group. Myself, I would not volunteer for this, simply because I have no
direct connection with the profession, and it would be inappropriate -
I'm a computer techno-weenie who doesn't know anything about thinks
optometric.

But, from my perspective, if Otis _were_ gone, this place would
function far better, and not need a moderator at all! So perhaps it
would be _worth_ someone moderating the group, if only so they could
make sure Otis' posts don't get in anymore!

I dunno - seems to me that if we can't change his behavior, he has to
be prevented from posting.

???

I think I'll start a new thread on this.

The Central Scrutinizer wrote:
- quote -

No, that's the point. You won't see. I gather that people
tried this years ago and still do on occassion. I don't
believe that Otis has ever done anything other than
spout rhetoric. At least for the while I've been here.
That's what Otis does. The odds that you will be the
one to have an actual discussion with a fanatic is very
very slim. I'm not a psychologist so maybe I'm missing
something here.

-Quick

- quote -

That clarifies things perfectly, thanks.

- quote -

No, I'm not cracked. Well - I _am_, but not in any way that ... never
mind.

My 'angle' is that it's easy for him to keep on as he has been, so long
as people just yell and scream and _tell_ him that he's wrong. What I'm
trying to do is give him a chance to tell _demonstrate_ why people
should listen to him, rather than spouting rhetoric - AND - failing
that, to _demonstrate_ that he's wrong, by simple cross-examination.
It's a fair question, and he either has an answer or he doesn't. How he
responds to a fair question that is relevant to his position will be
interesting - if he has an answer.

Obviously, my guess is that he doesn't. But we'll see.

"The Central Scrutinizer" <bobby_dread[at]hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:1140818867.930711.236480[at]i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
- quote -

A simple ''a'' should do.............

But Scrutinizer, if you realy expect to get a normal straight answer on
your question directed to Otis than you again make a joke out of Otis.

--
Free to Marcus Porcius Cato: ''Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam"

In conclusion, I think that the "Otis therapy" should be destroyed

Jan (normally Dutch spoken)

The Central Scrutinizer wrote:
- quote -

Ummm, you left out the possibility that you are not getting
a straight answer out of him because he *is* a joke....

Seriously though (all joking aside -) you can't possibly
expect a straight answer out of him can you? If so then
you may well be as cracked as he is.

-Quick

- quote -

Sorry, but I don't quite get what you're saying... are you saying that
if I want a straight answer I should make a joke out of him, or are you
saying that the reason I am not getting a straight answer is because I
make a joke out of him?

Apologies - your wording just isn't clear...

CS

"The Central Scrutinizer" <bobby_dread[at]hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:1140804935.107540.321070[at]t39g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
- quote -

I must agree, at first I laughed with a big smile but after a couple of days
the joke must come to an end.

But Scrutinizer, if you realy expect to get a normal straight answer on
your question directed to Otis than you again make joke out of Otis.


--
Free to Marcus Porcius Cato: ''Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam"

In conclusion, I think that the "Otis therapy" should be destroyed

Jan (normally Dutch spoken)

- quote -

Kinda sucks. It's been an entertaining couple of days, but I genuinely
wanted my question answered.