Looks like Xenonman finally got banned.
https://antipolygraph.org/cgi-bin/forums/YaBB.pl?num=1500617321/6#6

Wandersmann wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 3:07am:


I remember that the Agency polygrapher who was "interviewing" me posed the question as to whether my intention in applying for employment was to cause the Agency "harm". He also asked as to whether I had "studied" the polygraph. Back then, in those days of my innocence, I had no idea what he possibly could have meant by either question.   
Now today, more fully understanding the reality that is the IC and polygraphy in general, I suspect that my participating in a forum such as AP would today be interpreted as exactly what that jerk had in mind back then by my wanting to "cause harm" to the Agency.  I am glad that today we have such opportunities (that would not have been imaginable back in 1979) to cause such "harm".
The vile personal attacks made against myself and others at AP serve as confirmation for me that AP is indeed causing concern and consternation for an Agency which has for far too long relied on utter unaccountability and lack of visible scrutiny un order to cloak its continuing malfeasance.  The importance of that success in causing anger for the folks at Langley can never be underestimated.  The thuggish tactics of the pro-polygraph minority who attempt to deride, in increasingly hostile fashion, those who are crusading against this contemporary form of witch burning are a clear indication, to me at least, that the strength and influence of AP are on the rise, and that we have the truth on our side !   

quickfix wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 7:48pm:


By the way, Quicktrick,  "trolling" is another term for internet bullying.  I'm glad you admitted that is what you do.  It's in sort of a gray area right now between first amendment protected and criminal activity.  Lot's of prosecutors are trying to open the floodgates on prosecuting it.  Although the powers-to-be can't decide on whether or not it's a crime, everyone agrees that people who do it are a**holes.  I hope it doesn't trip you up on your next polygraph, but then you probably know how to use countermeasures and you also know that the "box" is a joke anyway.   

quickfix wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 7:48pm:


Quickfox:
Actually, Wandersmann is largely correct in his assessment as to my situation, particularly in regard to the years wasted in education and in acquiring skills and qualifications, only to be rewarded by unemployment, thanks to polygraphy, incompetent BI's, and lying Agency recruiters.

I won't respond to the rest of the garbage which you propagate; I am only responding to your vile remarks made to Wandersmann, insofar as they concern me. 

quickfix wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 7:48pm:


I'm not going to name names on this forum, but I've seen everything firsthand but the suicide.  You crack me up when you ask for anecdotal evidence.     Do you know that anecdotal evidence means evidence based on hearsay and not hard facts?  Thanks for proving what true morons you polygraph examiners really are            You think you are mind readers and psychologists but you have less education and knowledge than a hair stylist    Do you even have a high school degree?  If not, there is this thing called a GED.  You can work on that when you're not cleaning the latrines in between polygraph exams.  

If you want testimonials just check out this website.  How about the former Marine 1 pilot who was rejected from the CBP because the polygraph accused him of cheating on his wife?  It cost him a job and could of cost him his marriage.  Luckily he isn't married to a woman like the morons we've seen in these threads.  

You don't know anything about me.  Your foul language and threatening tone is all the proof anyone needs that you are a low class thug.  If you really understood honor and integrity you'd understand why this witchcraft offends honorable people.   I'm glad that you'll keep posting because you are one of the best recruiting tools for the anti-polygraph cause.  

If you wonder why I'm spending my golden retirement years (thanks for the age discrimination and disrespect by the way) I have good reasons.  I am a patriot and am sickened to see the honorable professions of law enforcement and intelligence tainted by clowns like you.  Also, I am involved in recruiting and am disgusted to think that so many of these good, decent young people who are working and sacrificing to get into my former profession are going to have their dreams ripped away because of this polygraph bull shit.  By the way, don't worry, I don't tell them anything about the polygraph.  I don't want to tempt them to check out countermeasures and give the Nazi's that run our security divisions a reason to go after them.  Keep on entertaining yourself on this site and thanks for entertaining us.   

Wandersmann wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 3:07am:

Total bullishit.  There is no evidence whatsoever to support this.  Show us anecdotal evidence.  You have none.  And I'm not going anywhere.  I will continue to "troll" and mock the fools like yourself.  You obviously have nothing better to do in your golden retirement years than to take up a cause that doesn't impact you personally.  Quite pathetic.

Thanks for your message!

Why should it be time to let go?  The IC is all still there, it remains as unaccountable as ever, and it continues to employ polygraph screening universally.

My past rejections for employment are only a tiny facet of my  concern over the continuing absence of IC accountability, the sacrosanct nature of security classifications, and the (mis)uses that intelligence agencies make of the polygraph.  This extended misuse of the polygraph now also extends to include persons on probation/parole and sex offenders, as well as the continued favorable treatment of  the polygraph in popular culture. 

As far as the issue of my responding to old threads, the problem is that many of the topics on the board appear to drag on for many years.  The first thread may be current, but successively older ones are still present on each topic, and I don't always remember to check the dates of each individual entry before replying.   

Ok xenonman, I don't mind your hate for the CIA Office of Security,  we all hate these polygraphers on here. But your incident was decades ago like in the 1970s or 1980s, correct? Long before this site, or the Internet,  was even publicly available. Don't you think it is time to let it go?

My real question is why do you logon and reply to threads that are many many years old? Nobody is still following those threads, so your responses are irrelevant.  Then you will reply to your own replies, which makes you seem a bit crazy.

Wandersmann wrote on Feb 16^th, 2017 at 3:07am:



Thanks Wandersmann for your comments.  Your observations are largely correct.

Unfortunately, many in law enforcement and security (which is what I believe these trolls are)  tend to react in this manner whenever they are challenged factually.  This would be especially the case in the the IC, since it is largely unaccustomed to public scrutiny of its components and their employment and hiring practices.

Quote:


I believe that this "guest" may have been the security thug that was trolling me on FederalSoup.

quickfix wrote on Feb 14^th, 2017 at 7:41pm:


That remedy would more accurately pertain to trolls like yourself, quickfix.

Quote:


Thanks, "Guest".  Unfortunately for you,  this forum is not run by the thugs from the Office of Security in Langley.

Quote:


That's showing quite a bit of nerve for a forum "guest" to ask an administrator for a member to be banned.   Maybe all "guests" should be banned?   

quickfix wrote on Feb 14^th, 2017 at 7:41pm:


Maybe he is unbalanced and maybe it's because he was an innocent man who worked hard to get into the Government and had it unjustly taken away by being falsely accused by the polygraph.  Lots of victims have reportedly suffered mental problems, divorce, bankruptcy, suicide, all due to the mental torture of watching their livelihood and reputation unjustly taken away by your polygraph BS.  It's bad enough that you ruin innocent people's lives to make your sham living, but then you berate your victims on this site!  You should be banned, or just go away.  You and the other polygraph thugs that troll this site are undoubtedly worried that your scam may eventually be shut down and there will be hell to pay and so you feel threatened and troll this site like a playground bully.  You're also scared that most people with half-a-brain might learn that countermeasures work and they are making a mockery of your 'profession' on a daily basis.   

In other parts of REAL law enforcement and intelligence there has been lots of criticism of different forensic experts and lab procedures and there are whistle blowers and other groups that attack these experts with the same vigor that anti-polygraph people attack the polygraph.  The forensic experts, however, are REAL scientists and aren't afraid or threatened by criticism.   Why don't you just be satisfied to collect your pay from your sanctioned scam and don't further attack the victims of your fraud.   

I have a suspicion that "Xenonman" may be mentally unbalanced (explains why he was rejected by both NSA and CIA).  Just look at his quotes at the bottom of every post where he wishes for death to every CIA employee.  You may also note that after posting to a topic, he turns around and posts 2, sometimes 3 or 4 replies to his own reply, as if he was having a conversation with himself.  In fact, there have been times where you see postings by him to 8 or 9 topics at once.  He is anti-polygraph's answer to a question no one asked.  Classic abnormal behavior.  The best remedy of course is to ignore his postings altogether. 

pailryder wrote on Feb 14^th, 2017 at 4:54pm:


That is not true. There was at least one instance of an antipolygraph poster being banned for repeated violations of our posting policy.

At present, however, there are no banned accounts, as all previous bans were lifted some time ago.

That said, I find that Xenonman's post have a very low signal-to-noise ratio, and I would urge him to refrain making pointless replies to years-old posts and posting flippant one-liners that contribute little, if anything, to the public understanding of polygraphy.

guest 187

Ban xenonman?  Of course, your kidding.
  
Banned posters have mostly been on the pro side and, to be fair, their behaviors were far more extreme than xenonman.  Only one anti poster has been banned.

Who the crappity smack is user "xenonman"?! For years this guy has been posting stupid shit on this forum. He will logon and respond to a bunch of now irrelevant  threads that are several years old, as if anyone is still following them or even still cares.  He is a troll who is still obsessed with his CIA rejection from decades ago, pathetic!

I believe hs also has an account on the Federalsoup.com forum under the name Michael S. Goodman, where he spews the same rhetoric.

What's the deal with this guy? Probably some retired fat old hag with no life. Admin, ban xenonman!