Sujet : Re: Is Richard a Liar?
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theory sci.logicDate : 15. May 2024, 18:04:34
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v22pv3$1006v$5@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 5/15/2024 11:26 AM, joes wrote:
Am Wed, 15 May 2024 10:43:47 -0500 schrieb olcott:
On 5/15/2024 3:21 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-05-14 19:42:08 +0000, olcott said:
On 5/14/2024 2:36 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 14.mei.2024 om 20:40 schreef olcott:
On 5/14/2024 1:30 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 14.mei.2024 om 19:52 schreef olcott:
On 5/14/2024 12:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 14.mei.2024 om 19:14 schreef olcott:
On 5/14/2024 11:13 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 14.mei.2024 om 17:45 schreef olcott:
On 5/14/2024 10:42 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 14.mei.2024 om 17:30 schreef olcott:
On 5/14/2024 10:08 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
In comp.theory olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/14/2024 4:44 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-05-12 15:58:02 +0000, olcott said:
On 5/12/2024 10:21 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-05-12 11:34:17 +0000, Richard Damon said:
On 5/12/24 5:19 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-05-11 16:26:30 +0000, olcott said:
What I said was not precisely correct. None-the-less claiming that I am
wrong without knowing the subject matter is the
reckless-disregard-of-the-truth
of defamation cases and dishonest.
Haha what?
Claiming that I am wrong knowing that no single valid counter-example
proving that I am wrong exists is dishonest and defamation.
So sue me.
Besides, we do know a counterexample.
It is reasonable for me to construe that this is a lie
until the counter-example is provided.
It is legally defamation to say that I am incorrect
knowing that no counter-example exists.
It is legally defamation to say that I am incorrect
knowing that one does not know the subject matter.
*THIS IS THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS POST*
*THIS IS THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS POST*
*THIS IS THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS POST*
Message-ID: <
v0ummt$2qov3$2@i2pn2.org>
On 5/1/2024 7:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 5/1/24 11:51 AM, olcott wrote:
*When Richard interprets*
*Every D simulated by H that cannot possibly*
*stop running unless aborted by H*
as *D NEVER simulated by H*
Richard is saying
for all "D simulated by H" there exists at least
one element of "D NEVER simulated by H"
Can this be an honest mistake?
-- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Geniushits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
Re: Is Richard a Liar?
Re: Olcott is a Liar!
