Tom:

I posted initially to better understand the thoughts of those that are against polygraph and hopefully find intelligent dialogue.  I believe that polygraph has contributed greatly to society, but there have also been abuses that are mostly caused by the humans at the controls of the instrument.   

I wouldn't blame a gun if someone used it inappropriately.  Similarly, I don't blame a polygraph instrument if it is used improperly.  Most people want to protect society and eliminate abuses.   

I enjoyed the exchanges with Ark - he was polite, thoughtful, and intelligent in his comments.  Thanks Ark - I hope to meet you some day.   

Lafayette's decision certainly did not bring the house down in Utah.  And the shark photos were meant to be funny; in no way does it mean I agree with their politics.  I trust the USG will evaluate the technology based on its merits.   

Let me reiterate what I've said before - all opinions expressed are my own.  You are correct in one of your comments - no other Converus executives are aware that I have posted on this site.  My opinions are mine and mine alone and do not necessarily represent the views of the company.  Converus' opinions are posted on our website - not here.

I could have easily posted anonymously, but elected to be straightforward and up front in hopes of good dialogue.  For the most part that didn't happen, so this will be my last post.

Happy Memorial Day to all.  This has been memorable.

Dan:

When you get elected President to the APA, you can start the change process.  Remember Trump won when everyone said he was going to lose big.  You may very well win big too.  If I was APA member, I would vote for you. 

I guess we should watch the Converus website to see if ARK gets appointed to the Advisory board?

Ark:

I would not even be let in the door much less be escorted to the gate.

You missed all of the fireworks.

Magan was using my mantra, and in the end prevailed.

If you can't makem see the light, makem feel the heat!  One of my favorite quotes from former president RR.

Dan Mangan wrote on May 30^th, 2017 at 12:47pm:


Dan -
           I have little to add except that this is the best line I've seen in my years of affiliation with antipolygraph.org.  Bingo!!!       My family origins are East German and my immediate family was fortunate enough to escape.  I never knew anyone more anti-communist/anti-socialist than my dad.  He used to always say, however, "the only thing worse than communists are people who make communists".  As a child I never really understood what he meant but later came to realize that people who make communists are these capitalist whores who would sell their own mother to make a buck.  There is no greater example of "people who make communists" than the majority of polygraph community (excluding you) and their supporters in security divisions.

Converus EyeDetect has yet another new target, the large scale market of PSCOT Polygraph Examiners.  My source in Las Vegas tells me they are contacting the sex offender treatment specialists as to UNSEAT the PSCOT examiner.  While it is a back door method they apparently have figured out that all of these ATSA Providers
Association For The Treatment Of Sexual Abusers are good prospects.  Selling the EyeDetect station and licenses are recurring revenue and essentially send the PSCOT examiners down the highway as they cannot compete on price. The ATSA provider is now in control and can test anytime he or she wants and is not beholden to the PSCOT examiner. Question is can EyeDetect make the grade when there is no interviewing component?. This should be an interesting war as an army of PSCOT examiners will eventually mobilize to hang on to this revenue.  More at:http://converus.com/treatment-providers/

NOTE WHITEPAPER ATTACHMENT ON CONVERUS SOLUTION-REPLACEMENT OF PSCOT EXAMINERS.

Dan:

I posted that when my source mentioned the PSCOT thing as he looks at AP site every so often. He does it from a library as he worked in Nothern VA with me until I got transferred overseas.  NSA is probably watching this site. 

I wonder how many EyeDetect examinees are going to test out Deceptive when he or she was really innocent?  Since no form of lie detection is 100% there very well could be victims here to from what I recall in one of your last posts about EyeDetect accuracy.  Maybe some of these units will end up in your area and you will get some real time feedback.

Dan:

It is not unusual for an innocent person to be convicted of a child related or other sex offense.  These are hard cases to defend, bur easy to bring.  The legal expenses alone are staggering and if the person is found innocent people still cry technical foul.  While I am conservative in most views of this world, I am concerned for any person that is classified as Deceptive using any one of these devices, EyeDetect included.

Do you think that the APA is going to post a decision regarding accuracy and other factors like they did with voice stress many years ago. I am sure they are obligated to do something to protect the PSCOT examiners that are not only members of the APA but the local state chapters as well.  I am sure this is going to be a high stakes battle as there is much for the APA too lose on this one.