Quote:


Abuse.

(where's a moderator when you need one.)

"confederate" is the planted audience member, who's in on the gag - the crying girl for Sangya, and PailRyder for you.

pailryder wrote on Oct 4^th, 2007 at 11:11am:


No, none.  Except to wonder why you do not either (1) admit frankly that the polygraph doesn't work well on people who know how it works, thus the necessity of keeping such information from the masses or (2) explaining how the knowledgeable person will be sufficiently anxious about the control questions to produce a chart not significantly inferior in accuracy to that of an ignorant subject.

It seems that you are now goose stepping in line with the rest of your profession.  What took you so long?

Ludovico wrote on Oct 5^th, 2007 at 12:31am:


And what, precisely, was his gag?  He was simply responding to the questions that I was posing to him.  I deny that he and I were in collusion, nor do I see what either of us would gain thereby.   

But regardless of whether we were colluding or not, his responses were either accurate, inaccurate, or a combination of both accurate and inaccurate responses.  If inaccurate, was he attempting to mislead me?  Or were both he and I trying to mislead people?  If the later, why would I not just create another account--it would be simple enough--and run both sides of the conversation?  That would ensure consistency and that the point that I wanted to get across would prevail; involving a confederate would simply make carrying any plot into execution more difficult with no gain.   

And if the information that he was giving was accurate, wherein lies the gag?  Really, that is simply too much violence for even polygraphers to do to the truth, to call accurate answers to meaningful and important questions a gag.  But the logic of the polygraph demands that, doesn't it?  You must cover up the truth in order for the lie detector to work with any degree of accuracy.  In your own minds, you are helping people by attacking those who are spreading the truth and, to be sure, there is some accuracy to these claims; ignorant people are more likely to produce accurate results than informed people.  Polygraphers are perforce anti-education.

No, no, go not to Lethe, neither twist
Wolf's-bane, tight-rooted, for its poisonous wine.
 
Keats Ode on Melancholy (1820) st. 1

Damn, maybe I'm not a polyex after all!  Everyone knows they don't read poetry.  As for the Rebel flag avatar, Hoddy Toddy, Ludovico.  Hell boys, I've been a confederate all my life.  If people on this board would stop treating the truth like toilet tissue, maybe, no sorry, ignore that.  Discussion on this board will never rise above the level of clone on clone violence on Jim Rome's sports radio show.   

But that gullible gag was funny.

Just so everyone knows, Lethe and I are not confederates, and I'd be willing to take a polygraph test to prove it.  Before you ask, no Ludovico, not from you.

I must ask. Lethe, why don't you just admit that you are George's alter-ego. Your posts are intentionally cold and inhuman, and George himself never seems to have comment---this being the only long-game thread he has not posted onto---and the diction and rythmic value of your "Lethe" literary style matches that of George's posts and also his sophomoric poetry.

Lethe

I am sorry that I my answers have not been helpful.  You come at this from an intellectual position with valid thoughtful questions and I can only offer answers based on my observations and experience.  Some time ago, I decided to see how an open approach might effect my practice.  The other examiners who post here will be horrified when they read this, but I fully discuss with my subjects the role of the CQ, how and why I developed the CQ, and how I expect it to use it to evaluate their response to the RQ.  I no longer lie to my subjects and I have observed only positive effects from this change.  I have not seen any evidence that this knowledge helps the guilty or hinders the truthful or adversly effects my ability to discriminate between the two.  True knowledge, I think, seldom works that way.  I know this is not what you want, but it is all that I have.  I am not a reseacher, not a scientist, not a logician.  Just a guy with a job that goes to the office each day and tries to treat others as I would have them treat me and mine if our roles were reversed.   

Thank you for your question and for our discussion.