Re: KRS - Possible news to come

From: Martin Reboul (martin.reboul_at_SPAMFUKvirgin.net)
Date: 09/18/04 

Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 16:03:41 GMT

"Tom McDonald" <tmcdonald2672@nohormelcharter.net> wrote in message
news:10knit9rh96bk90@corp.supernews.com...
> Eric Stevens wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > Even if all of whichwas true, it has nothing to do with the accusation
> > (which you snipped) implied in your final paragraph addressed to me:
> >
> > "As for 'a bunch of kooks slapping each other on the back
> > and encouraging themselves to strengthen their faith', you
> > might want to look outside the 'naysayers'. You may even
> > want to look in a mirror".
>
> Eric,
>
> I stand behind the first sentence. It is manifestly true.
>
> I retract the last sentence. It is not manifestly true.
>
> >
> > Your diatribe (above) about Inger, Michael Ruddy etc has nothing to do
> > with the discussion of why some people are not invited into behind the
> > scenes discussion of on going work associated with the KRS.
>
> It has quite a lot to do with it, actually. If, as was the
> case with Ruddy, most participants on these email discussions
> don't read newsgroups, and if they have developed trust with a
> participant who has, then if the latter person relays
> information and impressions of the ng to the email group that
> are strongly biased against some ng participants, how likely
> would it be that the email group would decide to invite
> interested folks from the ng to participate?
>
> Inger's behavior could have functioned as a blackball. It's
> related to the discussion of why some people are not invited to
> behind the scenes discussion of on going work associated with
> the KRS.

Has anyone ever given a reason as to why such invitations are not extended?

Surely this is a matter of scientific investigation, which only has any real
point in matters such as the KRS if the results are made public? Any 'secrecy'
or formation of an 'inner echelon' will only serve to arouse suspicion, and make
any such results and conclusions drawn from them unlikely to be taken seriously.

In other words, it looks like something has possibly turned up that does not
match the hopes or aspirations of those who ordered (and paid for) that research
to be done. What could they possibly have to fear I wonder?

As if we don't already know!
              Cheers
                       Martin

Loading