The look-alike contest

[eyesbleed]

TheBug said:

It was someone else who took the opportunity to express contempt for me by posting "Ya, exactly... misinformation put out there to throw off lots of people like you." I found that unnecessary since I simply answered a question and there was nothing false in what I posted. Later, it was stated that the W. Campbell information I was posting was "crap."

Well since we're explainin' ourselves........
I didn't really mean that yer posts themselves are "crap", but in general, misinformation that confuses the issue is crap... among other things... whether it's planned misinformation or a rumor gone haywire.
Either way, it does nothing but confuse the issue.

If all the W.Cambell/Gary Patterson school of misinformation was just mentioned in response to a question about the contest, I doubt that I'd think enough about it to merit a response.
BUT you've brought up the Cambell/G.Patterson-related stuff several times recently... every chance you get... makin' me wonder why you're bein' so persistant about it & prompting me to single YOU out

I doubt that we'll ever get any definative answers about this stuff, but I don't think repeatedly throwing that stuff into the mix at every opportunity does anything but confuse things.
Ya don't see us bringing up IBS or the KKK or any other elements of 60IF that we find useless.
I feel the same way about that little batch of info that was circulated beginning in 69. If it's known that it goes nowhere, why keep goin' down that road unless it's in response to a specific question.?

[DarkHorse]

TheBug said:

I have been desparately trying to find a photo of the winner, but have come up empty. Anybody else have any luck?

It was Barbara Streisand.

[FlamingPie]

DarkHorse said:

It was Barbara Streisand.

[xpt626]

TheBug said:

...I do not know what "OP" is.

OP = Original Poster

I am well aware of the content of this entire thread.

Your posts, in general, come across as argumentative.

...out of respect to the moderators.

of which I am one

[Doc]

Flaming said:

Each possess a leonine (lion-like) gaze....as does Michael York.

[Goldfinger]

DarkHorse said:

It was Barbara Streisand.

[glow=red,2,300]MASTERPIECE[/glow]

[Goldfinger]

xpt626 said:

OP = Original Poster

I am well aware of the content of this entire thread.

Your posts, in general, come across as argumentative.



of which I am one

Thank you for explaining the OP.

I know you are a moderator as I have adhered to your requests in the past.

I went back and looked and I don't think my answer to IWILL was argumentative. That answer was attacked. Why am I the one singled out for being argumentative?

[Goldfinger]

eyesbleed said:

If all the W.Cambell/Gary Patterson school of misinformation was just mentioned in response to a question about the contest, I doubt that I'd think enough about it to merit a response.
BUT you've brought up the Cambell/G.Patterson-related stuff several times recently... every chance you get... makin' me wonder why you're bein' so persistant about it & prompting me to single YOU out

ALL of my posts were responses to questions.

1. invanddis.proboards29.com/index.cgi?board=Clues&action=display&thread=1097792849

This was the first of the threads that I answered. The original question asked about the theory of PID. I gave a few sites throughout the thread giving some historical background for the whole PID story. G. Patterson was one, but one site I mentioned somewhere was a site of one of your own members. The Campbell item was just a small part of the history presented in the initial response.

2. invanddis.proboards29.com/index.cgi?board=TAR&action=display&thread=1098182373

Here is another thread started by someone else (not me.) Notice the topic of the thread is "William Campbell."

I had one post on that thread, and all it did was answer the original post. In no way was it agrumentative.

3. This thread, as stated, asked specifically about the rumored look-alike contest which is the W. Campbell story. Again, I simply answered the question.

The idea put forward that it is I who keeps bringing up this subject is factually incorrect, for it keeps being brought up by others. My answers to the OPs were non-argumentative, straight-forward and based on quotes from those actually involved. As far as I know, no one has said that my posts were lies. The argumentative posts came from others who attacked my answers to the OPs.

[eyesbleed]

TheBug said:

The idea put forward that it is I who keeps bringing up this subject is factually incorrect, for it keeps being brought up by others. My answers to the OPs were non-argumentative, straight-forward and based on quotes from those actually involved. As far as I know, no one has said that my posts were lies. The argumentative posts came from others who attacked my answers to the OPs.

So I took the time to try & explain why I responded to yer posts in the way I responded.
You can agree with me or not, but I feel like I had reason to respond the way that I did..


And besides.... we all now know his real name is Bill Whozit.

[Goldfinger]

eyesbleed said:

So I took the time to try & explain why I responded to yer posts in the way I responded.
You can agree with me or not, but I feel like I had reason to respond the way that I did..


And besides.... we all now know his real name is Bill Whozit.

Let's be formal.

It's William Whozit.

[eyesbleed]

TheBug said:

Let's be formal.

It's William Whozit.

Presenting..... William Whozit!

;D

[Doc]

OK, William Whozit, as our Protagonist in this magical mysterious story by Dr. Soose (to avoid confusion with the late, good doctor) must evolve through a series of "Soozical" circumstances that propel him from relative naiviteé to being more wordly-wise. He must be accompanied by a select two or three (three works) "personages" who are coincidentally resourceful for the journey, and be given some props, attributes, and "magic coins" to make his way. He must be met by a number of staunch opponents, adverse circumstances, and perplexing charactors along the path. The middle of the book must include a couple of large, full double page renderings showing the fanciful environs in which all these individuals live and grow.
One chief villain with bad breath, a nasty costume and an unappealing physicality is a must.

In the end, the William Whozit charactor reaches revelation, reinvention, and renewal. All this done in 60 pages of lively, imaginative full color cartoons scaled for easy reading by the innocent.

And the name of where they all reside has to be "Nespin's Tower". So, there has to be a high tower, high atop a craggy, rocky tor, Seuss-style. And there are tor-mongers, tor-tulls, tor-tusses, and tor-mentors.

I leave it with the "staff."

(I've always wanted to say that...hehehe......indulge my lapse into "grandness" just this once...)

Make me the "Grand Perplexi-Tor"............





;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D