AntiPolygraph.org Message Board - PD applicant has a question...

(Moderator: Administrator)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1 2 [3]

Add Poll

Send Topic

PD applicant has a question... (Read 18711 times)

Ray Senior User Offline Posts: 78 Joined: Jan 10^th, 2003	Re: PD applicant has a question... Reply #30 - Jun 6^th, 2004 at 8:38pm	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	Drew, Marty and I were having a rather civil discussion when you decided to join in and demand that I answer your questions before you would answer my question (which was never initially addressed to you). I'm not sure who you think you are...you want to dictate the direction of a discussion that you were never initially involved in? If I had initially posed the question to you I might understand your desire to control the conversation. The bottom line is that if you don't want to address my points, why should I even participate? Marty - Thanks for addressing my question. I think it's a VERY thin line George walks with his advice to applicants and I think he crossed it in this case.


	IP Logged

Drew Richardson Especially Senior User Offline Posts: 427 Joined: Sep 7^th, 2001	Re: PD applicant has a question... Reply #31 - Jun 6^th, 2004 at 9:53pm	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	Ray, The reason I joined this discussion uninvited (since when is a message board discussion a private affair) is that I find it hard to believe (and certainly worthy of commentary) that a representative of a community that individually "cross the line" of deception with each and every day in the professional office has the audacity to question whether an individual not a part of that community has in isolation crossed a related but different line of propriety.


	IP Logged

I-SMELL-BS-2 Guest	Re: PD applicant has a question... Reply #32 - Jun 6^th, 2004 at 11:29pm	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	Quote: Ray, The reason I joined this discussion uninvited (since when is a message board discussion a private affair) is that I find it hard to believe (and certainly worthy of commentary) that a representative of a community that individually "cross the line" of deception with each and every day in the professional office has the audacity to question whether an individual not a part of that community has in isolation crossed a related but different line of propriety. But the primary reason Drew is now so antipolygraph is because he is in business with the manufacturers of the "Brain Fingerprinting" lie detector machine that he hopes will replace the polygrah. Follow the money......he is simply trying to show the polygraph needs to be replaced by the machines he hopes to sell.


	IP Logged

Drew Richardson Especially Senior User Offline Posts: 427 Joined: Sep 7^th, 2001	Ray, Re: PD applicant has a question... Reply #33 - Jun 7^th, 2004 at 12:31am	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	ISBS, My rationale for joining this discussion stands as outlined in my previous post: Quote: Ray, The reason I joined this discussion uninvited (since when is a message board discussion a private affair) is that I find it hard to believe (and certainly worthy of commentary) that a representative of a community that individually "cross the line" of deception with each and every day in the professional office has the audacity to question whether an individual not a part of that community has in isolation crossed a related but different line of propriety. My employment with Brain Fingerprinting did not occur until roughly a decade after I first raised the concerns I have about probable lie control question test (PLCQT) polygraphy. And even now, that which I have repeatedly and largely expressed misgivings regarding is the use of the PLCQT for various screening applications. I find these to be nothing but completely invalid fishing expeditions with absolutely no theoretical basis for practice and one(s) causing to harm to individuals, various agencies, and the nation alike. I can assure you as long as I have any association with Brain Fingerprinting Laboratories, Brain Fingerprinting will never be used as a general screening tool, for lie detection, or any other questionable and/or invalid pursuits and accordingly will never make a single dime from any such activity.


	IP Logged

I-Smell-BS-2 Guest	Re: PD applicant has a question... Reply #34 - Jun 7^th, 2004 at 12:44am	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	Drew, you know very well you will have no say about how that machine will be used when it is sold and it you also know that you are pushing for it to replace the polygraph. But you, like George, want to act like you are so noble and have no other motives than the good of humanity - peddle that tripe to someone who doesn't know better.


	IP Logged

George W. Maschke Global Moderator Offline Make-believe science yields make-believe security. Posts: 6220 Joined: Sep 29^th, 2000	Re: PD applicant has a question... Reply #35 - Jun 7^th, 2004 at 3:45am	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	Ray, You earlier wrote: Quote: We all know the anti-poly crowd questions examiner integrity based on the procedures of an examination. With this in mind, is it fair that we should question George's integrity when he suggests that an applicant should "not volunteer" (lie by omission) specific information in the course of one's law enforcement application. A simple yes or no will do. I strongly disagree with your contention that my suggestion to PBR that he not volunteer the fact that he has exaggerated his past drug use to friends and colleagues is tantamount to suggesting that he commit a "lie by omission." Such information is not responsive to any relevant question in common use for pre-employment screening. Therefore, PBR has no ethical obligation to disclose it, and a choice not to do so would not constitute a "lie by omission," as you maintain. The question PBR asked regarding whether or not to disclose this information is one of pragmatics, not ethics.

	George W. Maschke I am generally available in the chat room from 3 AM to 3 PM Eastern time. Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.) E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: antipolygraph.org@protonmail.com Wire: @ap_org Threema: A4PYDD5S Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
	WWW Twitter YouTube IP Logged

George W. Maschke Global Moderator Offline Make-believe science yields make-believe security. Posts: 6220 Joined: Sep 29^th, 2000	Re: PD applicant has a question... Reply #36 - Jun 7^th, 2004 at 4:01am	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	Quote: But the primary reason Drew is now so antipolygraph is because he is in business with the manufacturers of the "Brain Fingerprinting" lie detector machine that he hopes will replace the polygrah. Follow the money......he is simply trying to show the polygraph needs to be replaced by the machines he hopes to sell. ISBS, Your contention is refuted not only by the fact that Dr. Richardson's criticism of CQT polygraphy pre-dates his association with Brain Fingerprinting Laboratories by years, but also by the fact that when he first made these criticisms, he did so against his career interests with the FBI. Indeed, the FBI retaliated against him for his candor, among other things prohibiting from testifying in court on polygraph matters, despite his eminent qualification to do so. Your scurrilous attack on Dr. Richardson's motives seemingly stems from an inability to refute his arguments with facts and reason.
	« Last Edit: Jun 7^th, 2004 at 10:38am by George W. Maschke »
	George W. Maschke I am generally available in the chat room from 3 AM to 3 PM Eastern time. Tel/SMS: 1-202-810-2105 (Please use Signal Private Messenger or WhatsApp to text or call.) E-mail/iMessage/FaceTime: antipolygraph.org@protonmail.com Wire: @ap_org Threema: A4PYDD5S Personal Statement: "Too Hot of a Potato"
	WWW Twitter YouTube IP Logged

Marty Especially Senior User Offline Posts: 499 Joined: Sep 27^th, 2002	Re: PD applicant has a question... Reply #37 - Jun 7^th, 2004 at 8:25am	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	Quote: ISBS, Your contention is refuted not only by the fact that Dr. Richardson's criticism of CQT polygraphy not only pre-dates his association with Brain Fingerprinting Laboratories by years, but also by the fact that he first made these criticisms he did so against his career interests with the FBI. Indeed, the FBI retaliated against him for his candor, among other things prohibiting from testifying in court on polygraph matters, despite his eminent qualification to do so. Your scurrilous attack on Dr. Richardson's motives seemingly stems from an inability to refute his arguments with facts and reason. George, lielabs, at polyplace, said this rather interesting piece on 5/31/04: Quote: I would think that if you understood the testing process you would understand the control questions are vitally important and based on your assumption would generate a reaction based on the knowledge that you must respond to those questions. If you did not understand that as your post suggests then it is more evidence of the damage other sites are doing to innocents. wdc (pillpopper) then responded that that would be, in his view, using CMs and unethical. It's rather interesting that lielabs, a moderator there, suggested (in the guise of a criticism) that innocents should "respond" to these controls if they sufficiently understood the process. I was rather surprised to find that admission. -Marty
	« Last Edit: Jun 7^th, 2004 at 5:22pm by Marty »
	Leaf my Philodenrons alone.
	IP Logged

stud New User Offline Posts: 7 Joined: Jun 5^th, 2004	Re: PD applicant has a question... Reply #38 - Jun 8^th, 2004 at 3:19am	Mark & Quote Quote Print Post
	Quote: I said DUD, rhymes with STUD, and that is exactly what I meant - you simply show your abysmal profound ignorance with every post. DUD - of little or no worth, one that is ineffectual, failure, misfit..... a perfect description of you you crappity smacking idiot. The only bullshit you smell is your own, because you are so so full of it. Nothing you say makes any sense, only nonsense, ha ha ha. You are a walking violation to the laws of nature. Get off this website, your advice is a repugnant odor to everyone on it, just like the ridiculous archaic polygraph you believe in.


	IP Logged

Pages: 1 2 [3]

Add Poll

Send Topic

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

PD applicant has a question...

Name:
E-mail:
Your Verification Code is:	Please type the characters that appear in the image. The characters must be typed in the same order, and they are case-sensitive.
Verification Code:
Preview

Message Icon:

Subject:

Message:
You can resize the textbox by dragging the right or bottom border.

Max 200000 characters. Remaining characters:

Text size: pt

More Smilies

View All Smilies

Collapse/Expand additional features

Attachments More Attachments

Allowed file types: txt doc docx ics psd pdf bmp jpe jpg jpeg gif png swf zip rar tar gz 7z odt ods mp3 mp4 wav avi mov 3gp html maff pgp gpg
Maximum Attachment size: 500000 KB

Attachment 1:

Attachment 2:

Attachment 3:

Attachment 4:

Attachment 5:

Attachment 6:

Attachment 7:

Attachment 8:

Attachment 9:

Attachment 10:

Disable UBBC and Smilies:

Check this if you wish to disable parsing of ubbc tags and smilies.

Return To:

Select where you would like to return to after posting.