Twoblock wrote on Mar 30
th, 2008 at 6:33pm:
Sackett
I don't condone falsehoods from EITHER side. If a post isn't blantant enough for me to decide (only a personal suspicion), I PM George for further info. If my suspicion is unfounded, I let it go. I don't automatically jump up and accuse them of being liars, turncoats, etc., like most polygraphers who visit this site because I can't confirm it and neither can you. All of you seem to feel that, by doing this, it is helping your cause. I personally feel that it is hurting your cause. I have learned from this site that, if I was to ever have to take a pre-employment polygraph, I would go in with the feeling that this guy/gal is going to treat me with unethical, rude, and maybe illegal behavior and I would be prepaired. I guarantee you I would beat you. This is the message that most of you leave in your posts. Given, a few of you are not like this, but how would I know what kind of personality I was going to meet?
"...and what about the "anti" posters, posting as multiple personalities here". Can you back up that statement with percentages of many against VERY few with true facts or are you guessing again?
You make an interesting statement. Especially given that every examiner on this board has been attacked as liars, unethical charletons, rude and criminal in nature and actions. Many of the anti posters here are caught up in a fanatical cause. That's OK, you'll attack me as doing the same, when all I do is my job. Difference is, you took a test, apparently failed and now crusade against it; while I perform them and make my living from them and successfully I might add.
If you don't "get" a statement, you PM George? That's not seemingly unbias on your part; therefore, your intentions and purpose are obvious.
This site is not about any truth, but how to attack polygraph and make it less viable. Call it a conspiracy, call it a crusade, call it freedom of information, call it a chat room, I don't care. Problem is, as previously stated to Mr Cullen, it is NOT going to go away! The minimal efforts here hardly have any effect on the use of polygraph as a whole, while examiners are in fact working hard to get standardized and more professional. This site does in fact help in that effort.
As for pre-employment testing. Examinees who come for pre-employments who "play" around in the test or display an attitude, will most likely not get the job they desparately want and probably worked hard for. So who's really tricking and being dishonest to whom...?
With only one recent claim that CM's worked (ie, sniper; and even he admitted he didn't really need them...) where are the many examinees who I (and others like me) catch on a fairly frequent basis?
Let's agree to disagree!
Sackett
P.S. As for "anti" poster imposters? Yes, it is apparent, but no, I can't prove it to you. Read the typos, misspellings and stories and they are clearly made by more than one, BUT, many are also as obviously repeated by the same, under a different name. As for providing proof of anything. Can you provide me proof that examiners can not identify CM's better than "chance"? Or better, can you provide me proof that CM's actually work? Empty challenges, by either side, mean nothing.