Sinaeb wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 10:53pm:

Sineab..I don't think this would be a good strategy. It would set up a confrontation where you have little power. IMHO you would be better off just to keep it all to yourself, never giving a clue that you are using countermeasures to avoid a false positive. If properly accomplished, the examiner would never know.

I am by no means an 'expert' and have taken only three "truth" examinations (two polygraphs and one CVSA) 

Honesty may be a rare commodity today (recall recent high school and college polls in which goodly majorities indicated it is "okay" to lie or cheat on exams) but often it is better to hold ones tongue. From all my reading here and links from here it seems that "professional companies" whose sole job or role is to give polygraphs make more money by "exposing" the lying applicant. On the other hand, if it is a law enforcement examiner, they have their own preconceived positions. Police deal with, generally, guilty people when they are sitting in interrogation rooms (that is often where a 'police department administered poly' is given) and statistics bear me out on this point. So now you are sitting in an interrogation room and, while this isn't about guilt, the officer or detective may not even know they are carrying a perception. 

As former LE (just after they did away with all horse patrols) I know that I (we) used to think that people 'lied even when telling the truth would save their behinds.' It just seemed that, especially those under suspicion, people simply would not tell the truth even if that 'was' the case. I began to think that everyone (except, perhaps, cops... right, I know it isn't true) would lie if any question touched on serious issues. 

We don't have an atmosphere of trust in America today. The country itself, never mind applicants hooked up to very questionable devices being operated by people who you have not one shred of information about, seems in emotional conflict every moment and the two, perhaps three, sides are very unwilling to negotiate.
Tension and anxiety more or less are the rule and then add a need for employment and all that entails and a poly or CVSA would seem impossible to pass.

Lastly (sorry), even if I disagree with someone's job or their position in a process I don't think I would say "he" is insulting (or even what he believes in is insulting). Not wanting to sing kumbaya but simply noting that aggressive confrontation seldom results in anything but use of force before the rules of escalation have been followed  ;^)

I want to, again, thank this forum for a 'forum' to discuss issues that hit so close to the soul of humanity. Trying to live thru failed examinations when your very character is being assailed is hard and this forum gives examinees a place to resolve some of their frustrations and information to ameliorate the real angst.

insulting his job

I would suggest you are very sold on yourself and don't need a job with that type attitude.  You would be well served to use some humility and intelligence.  Your knowledge of polygraph does not affect the examination result, other than to produce a possible inconclusive result in my experience.

Perhaps you are still correct in you assumption that most law enforcement examiners are not comfortable with informed subjects, but the private polygraph examiner community, in my experience, is quite well prepared to deal with this issue.

I'm saddened to say that in my opinion, most polygraph operators lack the integrity to treat such an honest applicant with dignity and respect. Such candor on your part is highly likely to result in an arbitrary accusation of deception and/or countermeasure use.

More than a decade ago, I asked the then president of the American Polygraph Association, Skip Webb, how APA members should handle examinees who understand the various deceptions on which polygraphy relies. He declined to say:

http://antipolygraph.org/read.shtml#informed-subjects

The polygraph community has yet to come to terms with how to deal with informed subjects who are candid enough to admit to their knowledge of polygraphy.

What are my consequences going in guns blazing in the pre-interview, letting the polygrapher know that I have read such books as TLBTLD and DoDI LEPET?  Giving knowledge of how the test is scored and pretty much insulting his job?