Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Attachments: (Clear attachments)
Restrictions: 4 per post (4 remaining), maximum total size 192 KB, maximum individual size 64.00 MB
Uncheck the attachments you no longer want attached
Click or drag files here to attach them.
(Clear attachments)
Other options
Verification:
Please leave this box empty:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
What color are the stars on the U.S. flag?:
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by EosJupiter
 - Nov 08, 2005, 12:48 PM
My Haiku ...

Apply named Ode of the Cobra :

Never trust a snake
The look is sincere but fake
The mongoose will win

Couldn't resist the opportunity !! hehehe

It seems that deception detection is better with thorough analysis, non-arguable evidence, and of course the human brain.  Again I see no polygraph in sight and the SR & JR Cobra got bagged. Oh thats right I found them deceptive earlier the same way.  hehehe

I love little gifts from heaven ...  
Posted by Administrator
 - Nov 08, 2005, 06:56 AM
Posting privileges of darkcobra2005 and Mercible have been permanently suspended. This father-son tag team misrepresented their relationship and only acknowledged the truth when it was presented to them with irrefutable evidence (not all of which has been publicly posted). At that point, darkcobra2005 promptly deleted all of his roughly 165 posts. Note that darkcobra2005 is a repeat offender. He previously forged posts as thevet2/checking. Such game-playing violates the trust of all who read this message board and will not be tolerated.
Posted by polyfool
 - Nov 08, 2005, 01:35 AM
Quote from: Mercible on Nov 07, 2005, 07:29 PMGeorge,

So, why did I not immediately make my family connection known?  Simple enough, I wanted my thoughts, comments, arguments to stand or fall on their own.  Also, didn't want to be found "guilty" by association as Polyfool has already done now:

That really hurt my feelings...  :'(

True in some respects, but my wife swears I was adopted.

Polyfool, for someone who hated being called a liar, you sure are quick to point the finger without any proof. >:(  Are you just trying to get under my skin or do you really believe I lied to you or anyone else on this message board? If so answer the following:  

Where have I lied on this site? (better be able to back is up with more than just speculation)

What game(s) have I played?

Everything I have written was exactly how I feel and what I believe.  All the info I have given about myself it true and correct.  Had I been interested in deceit, I would have never said the things I did about myself or my father which led George to be able to connect the dots.  I figured someone would eventually make the connection and I was pretty sure I'd get some derogatory reactions such as Polyfool's.  But Polyfool's post only confirms the points I made earlier about there being a propensity for people who are not 100% anti-poly to get attacks leveled at them on this site.  Had anyone of you suspected my relation to Darkcobra and asked me directly, I would have replied honestly as I did with George when he e-mailed me privately.  I've got nothing to hide, so ask away!  

George, Polyfool, and everyone else.... I whole-heartedly apologize that my relation to Darkcobra was withheld.  :-[  I don't see why it really matters, but apparently it does to you and I have to respect your feelings in the matter.  If this causes you to doubt my motivations for my posts then please re-read my last post answering the direct question from Polyfool:


If you want me in the debate, I'll gladly continue to post.  If you don't, just say so and I'll just as gladly leave you alone.  As you can see above, I've already changed my personal text under my Icon to state the following "Darkcobra IS My Father."  Hopefully that will avoid any confusion for new folks who visit the site.

So, where do we go from here?  Don't know, but it should be interesting either way!

Sincerely,
Mercible (a.k.a. Darkcobra Jr.)


Cobra Jr.,

Both you and your father misrepresented yourselves on this site and hid your relationship while you backed him up, making him out to be the poor victim being attacked by other posters--LIES, LIES, LIES.  The definition of a  misrepresentation is the sense of presenting information in a way that does not accord with the TRUTH.

As for the games, allow me to refer to the "Baad feeling in my stomach" thread where you quoted dear old dad about how he's so concerned about false positives and you go on to coyly ask him what he does to help prevent false positives, does he report them--blah, blah blah.

DarkCobra Sr.,

It was difficult to get past your initial FALSE postings, but  I  gave you the benefit of the doubt as many other fair minded posters on this site and engaged in some discussion. After I said, all polygraphers are not the same and even defended you, I now find myself eating those words. You should be ashamed of yourself--pretending to be concerned about false positive victims. Why should anyone believe anything you say? You're probably just here to gather ammo to better catch examinees in your trap. I hope you've had a really good time playing with people, but the posters on this site are real victims who have suffered at the hands of an invalid testing procedure and/or unethical examiners. There's nothing funny or entertaining about that. I'm glad you won't be posting anymore disingenuous entries here. What a total waste of everyone's time. And don't think we didn't all notice how often you declined to respond to  counterpoints and questions about polygraphy. I for one, regret wasting my time on you. Why don't you crawl back underneath the rock from which you slithered?

As for you Cobra Junior,
I have zero interest in conversing with someone reared by a snake. You know what they say, "Like father, like son..." ;)
Posted by Sergeant1107
 - Nov 07, 2005, 10:16 PM
 
Quote from: Mercible on Nov 07, 2005, 07:38 PM

You folks just lost your best ally in the fight to banish the use of polygraph in pre-employment screening. What a shame!  
I have found the majority of the posts under the name "DarkCobra" to be fair-minded and informative.

However, I do not see him as an ally to the antipolygraph crowd.  He has recently written that he believes the accuracy of the polygraph to be greater than 90-95% if a skilled examiner is involved.  I do not believe someone could claim that the polygraph is more than 95% accurate and still be in favor of abolishing its use.
Posted by polyscam
 - Nov 07, 2005, 08:23 PM
Well that's too bad in my opinion.  I thought Darkcobra2005 added to the conversations and in many instances contributed useful information.  Although I didn't agree with him on many points, it was nice to have the point of view of a polygrapher.  One that was not "militant" in his defense of polygraphy.

I must mention that I did not see an out and out family issue brought up or an attack, only the possibility of a familial relation between Darkcobra2005 and Mercible.  The mention was that there stood a possibility of a parent/child relationship which was not being disclosed.  The problem many of the posters have on this site with limited disclosure is our previous experiences with polygraphers in which we were advised to hold nothing back, to provide full disclosure.  It would be along the same lines as having one of my family members log on to agree with me on my points and give credibility to my statements.  That would seemingly be faux agreement.  According to what you have written, Mercible, that was not exactly the case.

Mercible, I am sure now that you know of my story with polygraphy.  Does that help you understand the viewpoints of the many anti-polygraph posters on this site (those who have been refused further application processing due to a false-positive result)?

I may be in the minority but personally, I would like to see Darkcobra2005 continue to contribute.  However, ultimately that decision is not mine.
Posted by Mercible
 - Nov 07, 2005, 07:38 PM
Quote from: George W. Maschke on Nov 07, 2005, 07:06 PM

Goodbye, darkcobra2005.

You folks just lost your best ally in the fight to banish the use of polygraph in pre-employment screening. What a shame!  
Posted by Mercible
 - Nov 07, 2005, 07:29 PM
George,

I've responded to you privately, but you admonished me to respond publicly as well.  So, here it is....

Darkcobra2005 IS my Father. Now doesn't that sound like something off of Star Wars?  "Luke, I AM Your Father..."  ;D

All kidding aside, there was no game playing or collusion here.  Dad (darkcobra) wanted me to see the website and see the postings he had done.  Without his knowledge or consent, I joined the site and started posting myself.  I'm sure he was surprised when I did.  And, you are right, there is no "shame" in it for me.  I'm very proud of my father and the person he is.  Yes, he started out on this site under "false" pretense as you call it, but I think he was just bored and wanted to be a pain in the A**, which he is good at sometimes.  :o (Sorry Dad, remember I have to be honest here)  

Since he started posting as Darkcobra, it appears he is genuinely engaged in the debate and is seeking to truly help people who have been falsely accused of being deceptive.  I'm sure Brandon Hall and others can attest to that.  

So, why did I not immediately make my family connection known?  Simple enough, I wanted my thoughts, comments, arguments to stand or fall on their own.  Also, didn't want to be found "guilty" by association as Polyfool has already done now:

QuoteIf he is Cobra's offspring, I suppose he gets the lying and game playing honest.
That really hurt my feelings...  :'(

QuoteI suppose the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.....
True in some respects, but my wife swears I was adopted.

Polyfool, for someone who hated being called a liar, you sure are quick to point the finger without any proof. >:(  Are you just trying to get under my skin or do you really believe I lied to you or anyone else on this message board? If so answer the following:  

Where have I lied on this site? (better be able to back is up with more than just speculation)

What game(s) have I played?

Everything I have written was exactly how I feel and what I believe.  All the info I have given about myself it true and correct.  Had I been interested in deceit, I would have never said the things I did about myself or my father which led George to be able to connect the dots.  I figured someone would eventually make the connection and I was pretty sure I'd get some derogatory reactions such as Polyfool's.  But Polyfool's post only confirms the points I made earlier about there being a propensity for people who are not 100% anti-poly to get attacks leveled at them on this site.  Had anyone of you suspected my relation to Darkcobra and asked me directly, I would have replied honestly as I did with George when he e-mailed me privately.  I've got nothing to hide, so ask away!  

George, Polyfool, and everyone else.... I whole-heartedly apologize that my relation to Darkcobra was withheld.  :-[  I don't see why it really matters, but apparently it does to you and I have to respect your feelings in the matter.  If this causes you to doubt my motivations for my posts then please re-read my last post answering the direct question from Polyfool:

QuoteNow, a question for you. Why are you so interested in polygraphy? You say you're not an examiner, you've never taken one, yet you obviously feel passionate about it. Why?

If you want me in the debate, I'll gladly continue to post.  If you don't, just say so and I'll just as gladly leave you alone.  As you can see above, I've already changed my personal text under my Icon to state the following "Darkcobra IS My Father."  Hopefully that will avoid any confusion for new folks who visit the site.

So, where do we go from here?  Don't know, but it should be interesting either way!

Sincerely,
Mercible (a.k.a. Darkcobra Jr.)
Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Nov 07, 2005, 07:06 PM
Quote from: darkcobra2005 on Nov 07, 2005, 07:05 PMI was not asked a question, where was I dishonest.  The removing of posts is not to destroy evidence (what is the crime), I simply wish to withdraw from posting and participation on this site, I will, if allowed, monitor postings, however when you make it a "Family" issue, I don't care to participate further.  I did attempt to help persons on the board, but have found that now my family has been attacked and don't care to participate.   ANd no I am not ashamed, simply don't care to participate further.  Thank you for allowing me to have posted on your site in the past.  

Goodbye, darkcobra2005.
Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Nov 07, 2005, 07:00 PM
Quote from: darkcobra2005 on Nov 07, 2005, 05:29 PMDon't be suprised, it is a fact that I am Mercible's father, and your problem with that is?

You weren't honest. And now that your secret is out, I see you are deleting all your posts, to destroy the evidence, as it were. I suppose you do have a sense of shame.
Posted by polyfool
 - Nov 05, 2005, 04:18 PM
Quote from: George W. Maschke on Nov 05, 2005, 03:49 AMMercible,

I find it, um...interesting...that all of the "excerpts of posts that gave [you] the negative impressions [you] have so far" -- excerpts that you chose to quote out of context without regard to the remarks that prompted them -- just happen to be replies to darkcobra2005.

In your first post to this message board, you wrote "My Dad is a polygraph examiner and has been for the last 20 years!" Earlier in this message thread, darkcobra2005 wrote," I will state for the record that I have never had a complaint filed against me by an examinee in 20 years of polygraph." All this makes one wonder whether perhaps the polygraph examiner who is your father is none other than...darkcobra2005 himself! True?

Why would you choose to hide your relationship to darkcobra2005? It only creates doubts about your motivations for posting. If you are darkcobra2005's son, why not say so? There's no shame in it.


George,

I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Mercible is in fact, somehow connected to DarkCobra 2005. If he is Cobra's offspring, I suppose he gets the lying and game playing honest. If my memory serves me correctly didn't Cobra begin posting on this site as "vet2" and "checking"under the ruses that he didn't know anything about polygraph and was just trying to learn more about it? He kept up the charade and even gave out bad advice designed to trip up examinees, giving himself away in the process. That is, before you outed him after you checked his IP address showing that he had posted under more than one user name? I think that's how it went. Anyway, that would certainly explain Cobra junior's IP address comment.  I suppose the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.....

Posted by EosJupiter
 - Nov 05, 2005, 03:56 AM
Mercible

Funny thing is you do know alot about insurance ...
 
hmmm one does wonder ...

IP addresses and subnet masks don't lie either
Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Nov 05, 2005, 03:49 AM
Mercible,

I find it, um...interesting...that all of the "excerpts of posts that gave [you] the negative impressions [you] have so far" -- excerpts that you chose to quote out of context without regard to the remarks that prompted them -- just happen to be replies to darkcobra2005.

In your first post to this message board, you wrote "My Dad is a polygraph examiner and has been for the last 20 years!" Earlier in this message thread, darkcobra2005 wrote," I will state for the record that I have never had a complaint filed against me by an examinee in 20 years of polygraph." All this makes one wonder whether perhaps the polygraph examiner who is your father is none other than...darkcobra2005 himself! True?

Why would you choose to hide your relationship to darkcobra2005? It only creates doubts about your motivations for posting. If you are darkcobra2005's son, why not say so? There's no shame in it.
Posted by Mercible
 - Nov 04, 2005, 08:27 PM
Brandon & Polyfool,

This is a long post, so you may want to get a cup of coffee first.  I apologize, up front, but when I get on a roll, I just have to let it all out......

Yep, I'm certainly late to the table, no denying that at all.  As I write this, there are 19,140 posts and counting.  Darkcobra has 165 posts.  Unfortunately, my work schedule and family life have precluded me from reading the vast majority of them, but I'm catching up as quickly as I can.

Brandon, you say:
QuoteDarkcobra is quite different from many of the other examiner's I have communicated with in that there is the absence belief in the polygraph as an absolute.  This is not an admission that many a polygrapher would offer as most seem to be under the impression that this would destroy credibility on their part.

I would agree, Darkcobra seems to me to be very open-minded individual.  I think it is wonderful that he has the courage to state in no uncertain terms that polygraph is not an absolute.  But, what I'm not seeing is folks on the other side of the debate concede that there is any possibility that there may be some validity to polygraph.   They keep using the terms "Quackery" and "Junk Science."  Again, that kind of inflammatory language doesn't move the debate forward, it only alienates possible allies.

Brandon, I agree entirely with the remainder of your post.  Thank you for being one of the civil folks.

Polyfool, you say:
QuoteYou're a little late on the scene. Perhaps, you should do a search of Cobra's posts. He has been enaged in civil poly discussion with many users of this board for several months. He has said that he's concerned about preventing false positives and that the poly should not be used as the sole determining factor in employment. Hopefully, he and his examinees have benefited from information gleaned during these exchanges and I think his presence here has been beneficial to those shafted by unethical examiners by allowing them to see that not all examiners are the same.  

I would agree that "some" have engaged him in civil discussion, but here are some excerpts of posts that gave me the negative impressions I have so far:

Administrator 4-18-05:
QuoteHow appropriate that this polygrapher has chosen a venomous snake for his/her new user name.

George: 4-19-05:
QuoteDrew is not out of touch. Rather, you are a shameless liar too clever by half.

Anxietyguy 4-24-05:
QuoteYour profession is full of jesters and hypocrites.

Bill Crider 5-7-05:
Quotei tried honesty 4 times and failed all 4, so F*#k you.

Anxietyguy 5-10-05:
QuoteFor your sake I hope so, because after all what is a polygrapher qualified to do? Maybe you will be taking my order at the drive through. Try looking in the mirror the next day when the polygraph is exposed,wish I could be there to see the look on your face.

Anxietyguy 5-10-05:
QuoteWon't be long till everyone knows your game and you will be in the unemployment line. Cheers*

Anxietyguy 5-11-05:
QuoteOh I forgot you only need a GED to perform polygraphs.

Bill Crider 5-25-05: This one is my favorite, very creative
QuoteDarkCobra, you are an idiot, wrapped in a moron, covered by a fool. take your polygraph and shove it up your @ss.  

Polyfool 5-26-05:
QuoteI suppose expecting a little intelligence from you is too much to ask. I apologize for the mistake. It won't happen again.

Now, I will admit that the ferociousness of the comments has gotten better, but I think you have a long way to go overall.  I'm sure many of you have gained some respect for the "Shady Snake," I know I have.  I have respect for many of the non-examiners as well.  I hope I have shown that respect on all occasions when posting here.  

Polyfool, you say:

QuoteNow, a question for you. Why are you so interested in polygraphy? You say you're not an examiner, you've never taken one, yet you obviously feel passionate about it. Why?

I thought the answer would be obvious based on my very first posting to the site.  My father is an examiner.  He has been in the industry as an independent examiner for many years.  His life's work is of interest to me.  He believes polygraph to be a useful tool and can, in the hands of the right person, be used to accurately detect deception. I, of course, believe him.  Why should he lie to me about it?  He's never lied to me before.  Besides, the man is a human lie detector himself. Long before going to polygraph school he could sniff out a lie like a hound dog on the trail of a fox.  

So then, I find this site and decide to see what the opponents have to say.  The more I read, the more I was intrigued.  Yes, the snide comments by both polygraph proponents and opponents tick me off.  But, the underlying debate has merit on both sides.  After reading George's story, I decided I needed to pay careful attention to his postings.  I read TLBTLD.  Then I re-read it.  

I then asked myself, can I help?  Is it possible to bring the two sides together to further the debate and gain true understanding?  I can tell you, the resistance I've met so far makes me think it is possible, but very unlikely.  But, being the eternal optimist that I am, I decided to wade into the debate and try it anyway.  

So, here I am.  I'm your average citizen who is now tuned into the debate.  I'd like to help.  I don't have any scientific or psychological background, but I can sure tell you what the average person will or won't buy into.  I think you guys need an outside perspective.  Granted, I am biased towards the use of polygraph, but I have a lot of strong views about the use of it being very limited and much regulated.  But, because polygraph isn't my lively hood, the abolishment won't affect me.  It won't really even affect my father as he is slowly scaling back the number of tests he runs and will eventually retire altogether.  Also, I haven't had the misfortune to be the subject of a botched exam.  I know that makes you feel very strongly about the issue, but perhaps it also taints your view a bit too.

For those of you who are still skeptical about my intentions, or that maybe I'm one of those dubious polygraph examiners who are just posing as someone else.  Feel free to ask the Administrator of the site whether the IP address I'm posing from doesn't match my story.  I happen to know the IP address should actually tell him which Insurance company I work for.  

Speaking of Insurance... George, you said:

QuoteThank you for explaining the situation with your own liability insurance. It does seem odd to me that your insurance company would require you to obtain liability waivers that have no legal force. But I have no further questions of you in this regard.

Thank God! Something I can speak with authority on.  Professional Liability insurance policies (also called E&O policies) vary from company to company.  Each company also decides their underwriting requirements for their policies. There is no true "standard" in the industry as professional Liability policies are very unique and pose the greatest risk in most instances.  The policy language may not require that a waiver be signed by a subject; the policies are usually worded very broadly.  But, the underwriter of the policy can always require proof of certain documents used in the course of conducting certain types of business.  

As Darkcobra states, these waivers are as worthless as the paper they are written on.  Similar waivers and release documents are signed in the course of settling claims, but they are just as worthless.  I've seen them defeated in court many times.  Yet, the insurance companies still use them.  It amounts to a handshake agreement and makes the person who received the settlement a little less likely to reopen the claim.  The only waiver or release forms that do withstand the scrutiny of the courts are the ones where the lawyer of the person who signs the form also signs off on the form.  This indicates that the person's lawyer was there to fully explain the language to his client before the client signed the form.  I doubt many people who take a polygraph bring their lawyer with them to co-sign any documents. Maybe they should?

Next time you rent a car, take a look at the waivers and releases in that agreement. Yikes!

Anyhow, the weekend is finally here.  I hope everyone has a great weekend.  

Mercible  
Posted by Sergeant1107
 - Nov 04, 2005, 07:26 PM
Quote from: darkcobra2005 on Nov 03, 2005, 03:39 AMTo state the polygraph is 100% accurate is of course pure non-sense.  The studies conducted have demonstrated 90-95% accuracy in controlled studies.  

Real Life studies are much more difficult to conduct since ground truth is not available in most cases.  If the controlled studies, in which little is at stake are 90 to 95% accurate, as demonstrated in the research, then I would suggest the real life examinations would be higher in the accuracy level.
Everyone's opinions are shaped by their experience.

Based on my own experiences with the polygraph, I would place their accuracy at 25%, since I failed three out of four tests while giving the same truthful answers on all of them.

I find it impossible to dismiss the large amount of anecdotal evidence on this site from people who, like myself, told the truth and were wrongly labeled as "deceptive."  

I suppose it is possible that some of the people who claim to have been falsely accused of deception were truly being deceptive during their examination.  But I think it is highly unlikely that everyone (or even a significant percentage) making that claim was actually deceptive.

I also believe that the accuracy of the polygraph must include the false-positive rate.  To me, the most problematic aspect of the polygraph is the fact that false-positives happen.  The rate at which they occur is debatable, but I have yet to encounter a single examiner who claims they don't happen at all.

As soon as you encounter a false-positive rate, the rest of the process quickly becomes meaningless.  If there were absolutely no chance that a truthful person could be labeled as "deceptive" then the rate at which polygraphs and their operators detected deception would be an actual accuracy rate.  Perhaps not all deceptive people would be detected, but at least you would know that when deception was detected it meant, with 100% certainty, that the person had been deceptive during the examination.

With an unknown rate of false-positives it becomes impossible to come to any conclusion after a polygraph, regardless of the result.  A "deception indicated" result means that the subject was deceptive, or the subject was truthful but is coming up as a false positive.  A "no deception indicated" results means that the person was truthful, or the person was deceptive but it was not detected, or that the person successfully utilized countermeasures.

In the end you have nothing but the guess, educated though that guess may be, of one person with regards to what another person was thinking.  You can achieve exactly the same results in a normal interview and I believe they would be just as accurate.  But they wouldn't have the aura of accuracy which the polygraph promises but fails to deliver.
Posted by George W. Maschke
 - Nov 04, 2005, 04:18 PM
darkcobra2005,

I'm not suggesting that you have stated anything that you didn't believe to be true. But it seems to me that in rationalizing the practice of demanding liability waivers from examinees, you jumped from one argument of convenience to another without adequately checking your facts.

Thank you for explaining the situation with your own liability insurance. It does seems odd to me that your insurance company would require you to obtain liability waivers that have no legal force. But I have no further questions of you in this regard.