EJohnson wrote on Oct 24^th, 2007 at 3:08pm:


Now THAT's funny.   

Quote:


Neato. I love the cryptic response. 

And the rat is;

Christopher Walken

I never trusted that googy-eyed bastard.

J.B.,

I indicated that we have a well-informed source for the information regarding Eric Johnson, Raymond Nelson, Donna Taylor, Ted Todd, and Lou Rovner's coordinated effort to debase the level of discourse on this message board. This is entirely consistent with what Gino has stated. Neither of us has claimed, as Mr. Johnson wrongly suggested in the initial post of this message thread, that this source has any connection with PolygraphPlace.com.

Gino,

What you have just posted contradicts what George indicated earlier.

George:
Quote:


Gino:

Quote:


George indicated on a different thread:

Quote:


Am I to believe that the two of you do nothing of the sorts with others of the same persuasion on this site?

With all due respect Gino, just answer the question. You can't possibly expect that we polygraph all 3000 examiners around the globe. If you want, we can do that, but we'll have to bill you for it. Where do I send the bill?

Clearly these guys are way too smart to help you with your little problem.  Rest at ease or submit to paranoia--your choice.  If you believe in your polygraph screening, I'd take the conservative approach and get going.  I think Gino's challenge to you clearly trumps yours to him.

Gentlemen,

As George already stated, I didn't in any way indicate the source of our cooperating rat--nor do I intend to do so.  The challenge is to you--identify him or her and publicly reveal that individual(s).

If you are confident that I got my information using my computer skills (you are indeed correct that I am a "nerd Webmaster"), then we can just let it drop.

Still, I'm going to bookmark this post in my favorites.

Take this as a warning in advance that I'm going to say "I told you so" if this particular source gets wind of something else good in the future and passes it along.

It would be fun to know whether Mr. Scalabrini actually knows the answer. I bet he doesn't. He's simply having some fun taunting us with the question about the rat?


There is no rat. If there were he'd tell us who is the famous photoshop.


His silence, of course, might be interpreted as a form of an answer.

r

Thanks Gino----er...George....uh......huh?

Mr. Johnson,

You are at liberty to draw any inferences you please.

Quote:



Soooooooo, do you always answer for Gino? I see that he is online now, is he too shy? Have you guys made a "coordinated attempt" to discredit my inquiry?  OK, so ya got no rat---just a nerd webmaster who looks up code and IP stuff. sweet

Mr. Johnson,

What I hoped to communicate is that your challenge will receive no response.

Quote:


Mr. Maschke,

Gino claims to have a Rat. The only place where such inside info could come from a "rat" would be the examiner's forum at Polygraph Place. I never stated that anyone "have any obligation" to "prove" anything. I challenged Gino, not you. Your tone indicates anger. I am not interested in "anyone" who provides information to antipolygraph.org---nor do I care about your opinion regarding my challenge to Gino. Therefore, I am here addressing Gino, not George.

Mr. Johnson,

Gino has not claimed that we "have a 'rat' at polygraph place Examiner board," nor does anyone who has provided information to AntiPolygraph.org have any obligation to prove anything to you.

If Gino does in fact have a "rat" at polygraph place Examiner board, than riddle me this batman;

What famous Examiner was lampooned for his hair with one of Ray's famous cut and paste jobs on the private forum---turning him into Marylin Monroe among other characters?

hint; This was a much discussed (and apologized over) hilarious weeks-long stunt that resulted in the much-teased polygraph examiner ceasing posting. If you can't answer this one Gino, than you have no rat---- only a savvy webmaster and too much time.



E