Some of Reef Fish's behavior MUST NEVER AGAIN BE TOLERATED

Discussion in 'Scientific Statistics Math' started by pescaandata, Aug 25, 2006.

  1. pescaandata

    pescaandata Guest

    Based on the number of his responses to my earlier posts, it appears
    I've touched a Fishy nerve. Someday I'll read them. One of the
    subject headers talks about comparing what I said a year ago with what
    I'm posting now. A year ago, I was cowed by Fishy's intimidating style
    and had hoped that he might become more collegial as time went on. His
    behavior has not changed and I refuse to stand by any longer.

    I also am not going to argue with him. If he posts something that
    warrants a reply from me, I will simply ignore his content and
    cut-and-paste what follows:

    ---------------------

    Reef Fish's belittling of other people is OUTRAGEOUS and UNACCEPTABLE.
    His "beer bottle" comment would have gotten him the bare minimum of a
    round of sensitivity training at any reputable institution in the US
    and maybe the world. Search sci.stat.math for "beer bottle".

    Reef Fish's comment that respected faculty were better suited to be
    university janitors should never have been tolerated. Search ssm for
    "janitor".

    His attacks on Rich Ulrich are UNCONSCIONABLE. Rich makes errors, but
    he's trying to help. Sometimes errors have gone unchallenged, but more
    often mistakes were corrected by others. Most of his posts required no
    correction and those recipients have been helped. Let Reef Fish
    correct the substance of Rich's posts, but there is nothing Rich has
    done to merit the personal, abusive rants that Reef Fish has meted out
    and often dredges up entirely out of context.

    I challenge ANYONE to defend Reef Fish's behavior in this regard.

    As for Reef Fish's own competence, please locate his post on "Test of
    two Independent Proportions: How to Do It RIGHT". Avoid any "update"
    that allows for "oversights". My post to the thread quotes the
    original in its entirety. Compare it to page 97 of the May 1977 issue
    of The American Statistician, "A Fundamental Question of Practical
    Statistics". Draw your own conclusions.
     
    pescaandata, Aug 25, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. pescaandata

    espyrian Guest

    Reef Fish is, by his own admission, "obtuse, belligerent, and
    insulting". Usenet is open, public and unmoderated. This is the price
    of entry to s.s.m. Indeed, this is the price of freedom of speech.

    My own conclusions are that Reef Fish would do himself a great service
    by avoiding the insults, that he is human and makes mistakes, that he is
    willing and able to own up to and correct those mistakes, and that he is
    one of the most highly competent statisticians here.
     
    espyrian, Aug 25, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. If we accept the *freedom of speech* as an absolute right we, the Readers, by the same reason, are not willing to give up the right to criticize Bob Ling by his manners. He cannot intend to have a special status – it´s not democratic.
    By the other and freedom, to be balanced, do not exclude politeness; it is even a must (however not explicitly demanded).


    __________licas (Luis A. Afonso)
     
    \Luis A. Afonso\, Aug 26, 2006
    #3
  4. [snip, previous]
    Espyrian -

    I thought you were crediting Reef Fish with insight and a sense
    of humility based on your failure to recognize one of the
    forged posts....

    Is that a post that has been deleted from Google?

    Google-groups finds < "belligerent and insulting" >
    in 45 threads since 1986, but not by Bob or in any relevant groups.
     
    Richard Ulrich, Aug 26, 2006
    #4
  5. pescaandata

    espyrian Guest

    "Belligerent" was misspelled. Try a search for "reef fish" +"obtuse,
    beligerant, and insulting". The quote is toward the bottom. However,
    on second look, I see that the line is actually indented. So it appears
    that Reef Fish was quoting someone else, not admitting anything. I'm
    not aware of the forged posts that you speak of.
     
    espyrian, Aug 26, 2006
    #5
  6. These were characteristics RFB advised the student BriAnn to warn her
    future teachers that _she_ displays. RFB is suggesting that she append
    that sentence to the prior quoted ones. Reef Fish, always protected by
    his narcissitic reality distortion field, would _never_ admit being
    "obtuse". He will probably take you to task severely for that ERROR. In
    rare moments of self-reflection he might momentarily accept the other
    adjectives, but then claim the insults to be literally ACCURATE and would
    most likely ascribe any belligerancy to EXTREME provocation.
     
    David Winsemius, Aug 26, 2006
    #6
  7. pescaandata

    Reef Fish Guest

    Espyrian,

    Thanks for you attempt to explain my position to the others. You are
    quite
    correct, for the most part. But you were wrong this time, about the
    quote.

    BriAnnMartin> I am also obtuse, beligerant, and insulting.

    RF> It's the Free Market -- anyone and everyone is entitled to be
    RF> blissfully ignorant and wallow in their ignorance, in the face
    RF> of correct answers that had already been given, with documented
    RF> REASONS that no one was able to refute, with reason -- the fact
    RF> that your stated model,

    The misspelling is helpful in locating that post. It would be a forged
    post,
    it it had not been positively identified.

    You'll NEVER find me say "I am obtuse", because that cannot be farther
    from the truth.

    You MAY finding me say "I am also belligerent" under certain
    circumstances.

    You may finding me agreeing the "I am insulting", in situations
    typically
    involving Richard Ulrich or Luis A. Afonso, where I had been
    gratuitously
    insulted by them, and I was giving them the "quid pro quo" reply in my
    insulting prose.

    I am not at the beautiful Moorea, of the Society Islands of French
    Polynesia.

    As I said, I would drop in to see how Afonso is doing.

    Well, it's about what I expected. The ignorant lunatic as he has
    always been.

    Meanwhile, I have to do some scuba diving and have a good time with
    other
    reef fishes and the grey reef, black tip and an occasional lemon shark
    that
    are quite abundant in Moorea. Have dived here on at least 4 other
    trips
    before.

    -- Reef Fish Bob.
     
    Reef Fish, Aug 26, 2006
    #7
  8. So your photographic memory saw the string beginning with "> I am.." and
    you are now erroneously atributing it to BriAnn? I think the error count
    has ticked up, again.
     
    David Winsemius, Aug 26, 2006
    #8
  9. Tesaurus : (of the invectives directed to me by Bob Ling) Aug. 26, 2006 2:03 PM

    *** Well, it's about what I expected. The ignorant lunatic as he has always been.***

    ______licas (Luis A. Afonso)
     
    \Luis A. Afonso\, Aug 26, 2006
    #9
  10. pescaandata

    Reef Fish Guest

    So, pescaanded started THIS news subject, in that of the subject
    "pescaaned
    Today and pescaand Last Year" where it belonged and in which I had
    invited
    pescaand to comment of the LAST post of his in June 24 2005 (which he
    requested Google to remove) as to WHY his change after a year of
    inaction:

    pescaand
    RF> in the sci.stat.math group:
    RF> http://tinyurl.com/brs7h

    *> It turns out that if
    *> the Reef Fish's presumed name is entered into Google between
    *> quotes and with his middle initial, Google returns "about 159"
    *> results, about 70 of which are displayed before "In order to
    *> show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries
    *> very similar to the 70 already displayed" ALL of which are
    *> about that one person and show that person's statistical
    *> credentials to be beyond reproach.

    RF> The reference tinyurl was MY post on June 24, 2004, in response to
    RF> pescaand's post of the same day, which he had asked Google to
    remove!
    RF> pescaane's post is no longer in the Google archives, but Google
    retains
    RF> the blank slots where posts had been removed!
    This is the first time I ran across a LIE of exaggerated compliment.
    pescaand was "cowed by my intimidation" to post that piece of
    voluntary
    compliment?
    and that was why he had the post removed by Google, so that I won't be
    able to retrieve it as evidence of HIS self-contradiction?

    There's nothing to argue about. You act was completely uncalled for
    and unsupported by any evidence. If something that warrants a reply
    (which you had not even SEEN) what you suggested is much worse
    than someone who merely said they would have me killfiled -- which I
    always characterized them as the ANTI-INTELLECTUAL who thinks
    that by playing an ostrich with their head stuck in the sand that their
    own problems will go away?
    So, this pescaand's pre-response to MY (not yet made posts in the
    future):
    It turned out the "beer bottle" reference showed only his severe
    impairment
    in HUMOUR, because (I'll show the exact context in the post where it
    belongs) BriAnnMartin was just ASKING (if not baited) for the joke,
    when
    she said which I'll give the exact quote later something like,

    "I am a student, and a blonde, ..."

    So, I obliged her with a joke about blondes, because why on earth would
    she put in the fact that s/he is a blonde, in a discussion about Linear
    Models, about which she asked questions in sci.stat.math?

    For the rest of it, follow in the "pescaand Today ..." thread.

    -- Reef Fish Bob.
     
    Reef Fish, Aug 27, 2006
    #10
  11. Bob Ling wrote

    *** All your Monte Carolo showed is that if you give a lunatic a Qbasic
    program compiler to run such programs, he'll be able to waste an
    enormous
    amount of COMPUTING TIME, to prove that which could have been proved
    without any of his Monte Carlo programs, that
    Luis A. Afonso is a total ignoramus, in Statistics.***


    No reasons, only noise.
    A tentative to attack the soundness of a technique that was proved to be useful since 60 years ago.

    The Bob Ling ignorance touched this points at least
    ____ignorance that the chi-squared test statistic is discontinuous
    ____ignorance that the Birthday Matching Problem had several and important improvements since the XVIII century.
    ____ignorance that the null hypotheses has zero importance if is true or not.
    ____ignorance that the a Court verdict could not to be compared to a Hypotheses test decision because a complete innocence is not impossible to occur (a confusion completely proved by witnesses the impossibility the defendant to be at the local)
    An so on.


    Enrico Fermi was not an opera singer.
    Von Braun was not a grocer’s owner selling sausages
    Manhattan is not the name of a Project to provide New York with a underground.
    ORNL is not a exorcism formula.
    The atomic bomb was not a mere nightmare Openheimer suffered after eating an entire turkey at the Thanksgiving diner.
    But there were very important problems on neutron diffusion sixty years ago using Monte Carlo at Oak Ridge.


    _________licas (Luis A. Afonso)
     
    \Luis A. Afonso\, Aug 28, 2006
    #11
  12. Bob Ling said
    (Aug 28 , 2006 4:09 PM)

    *** It's the same lunatic Luis A. Afonso.

    -- Reef Fish Bob.***
     
    \Luis A. Afonso\, Aug 28, 2006
    #12
  13. pescaandata

    Reef Fish Guest

    Why are you using pescaand's subject instead of one of
    your own that exhibits YOUR lunacy?

    Poor CRY BABY.

    What about your insults of Jack, Kevin, OMU (as the Paltry
    American, and making reference to that racial slur on Reef
    Fish Bob?)

    What you cited was the REVIEW from a MODERATOR of this group, ME!

    -- Reef Fish Bob.
     
    Reef Fish, Aug 28, 2006
    #13
  14. pescaandata

    Reef Fish Guest

    I think I said that on Aug 29, 2006, some time before 11 AM!
    Prior to the appearance of your post, I had already invited comment
    on the MODERATOR for this group, specifically, on HOW to
    moderate the behavior of one Luis A. Afonso.

    You are welcome to participate.

    -- Reef Fish Bob. (Acting sci.stat.math member of Self-Moderators)
     
    Reef Fish, Aug 28, 2006
    #14
  15. Bob wrote
    (Aug 28, 2006 4:09 PM)

    *** Why are you using pescaand's subject instead of one of
    your own that exhibits YOUR lunacy?***


    _______licas (Luis A. Afonso)
     
    \Luis A. Afonso\, Aug 29, 2006
    #15
  16. pescaandata

    Reef Fish Guest

    I am in this thread with this title because it was prescaand attacking
    ME,
    and I gave my response.

    Sadly, prescaand had nothing to say about Luis A. Afonso, yet Afonso
    had FIVE posts (all NOISE) out of 15, including a new subject.

    You are the kind of pollution SCUM that should be given notice by
    everyone in the group.

    Unfortunately, most of them claimed they had you killfiled and thought
    they had responsibility fulfilled to let a maniac like Luis A. Afonso
    run
    amuck in a scientific discussion group.

    -- Moderator of sci.stat.math,

    -- Reef Fish Bob.
     
    Reef Fish, Aug 29, 2006
    #16
  17. Bob Ling wrote
    (On Aug 29, 2006 2:37 PM)


    *** Unfortunately, most of them claimed they had you killfiled and thought they had responsibility fulfilled to let a maniac like Luis A. Afonso run amuck in a scientific discussion group.***

    ________________licas (Luis A. Afonso)
     
    \Luis A. Afonso\, Aug 30, 2006
    #17
  18. pescaandata

    Reef Fish Guest

    That's a FACT.
    That is ALSO a FACT.

    That was my simultaneous indictment of those who thought their
    responsibity
    if fulfilled by merely klilfiling Afonso, and an indictment of the
    OBVIOUS maniac,
    Luis A. Afonso, who has run amuck (not just by himself, but dragged a
    few others
    posting in his name) to pollute the entire sci.stat.math newsgroup.

    You quoted me correctly this time. Your implicit WHINING will get
    only
    crocodile's tears for you.

    -- Reef Fish Bob.
     
    Reef Fish, Aug 30, 2006
    #18
  19. Bob Ling wrote:
    (Aug 30 , 2006 , 3:47 PM)



    *** . . . who tried to donate free time to ignoramuses
    like the Afonsos. ***

    _______licas (Luis A. Afonso)
     
    \Luis A. Afonso\, Aug 31, 2006
    #19
  20. pescaandata

    Reef Fish Guest

    Whoever posted that wasn't what Luis A. Afonso said.

    However, Reef Fish did not single out Afonso as THE Ignoramus of
    the group -- only ignoramuses like the Afonsos (the FIVE of them).

    So, Luis A. Afonso is now making himself the spokesman of ALL
    ignoramuses in sci.stat.* ?

    Or did Luis A. Afonso posted that without comment to show that
    he is in accord with the statement? Or was he a CRY BABY?

    One doesn't know when Luis Afonso misattributed the poster, and
    had nothing to say to the posted statement.

    -- Reef Fish Bob.
     
    Reef Fish, Aug 31, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.