- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Dan Mangan
- May 30, 2017, 10:41 PMTom, make no mistake.
EyeDetect will become the new polygraph.
It's all over but the crying.
EyeDetect will become the new polygraph.
It's all over but the crying.
Posted by Tom Tesslin
- May 30, 2017, 10:13 PMDan
I do not want to beat a dead horse on EyeDetect as people are probably sick of this topic considering the exchange over Memorial Day. However, do you think that EyeDetect is going to be the NEW polygraph and take over. I know that sounds strange, but these people apparently have limitless amounts of money behind them and could very well purchase the market share. I suspect that is what sent Lafayette fleeing for cover is the very threat of that premise.
It would be interesting to get feedback from Joe, the poster from TX, as he is in the PSCOT business and from what have read done a pretty good job of fending off the TAPE and APA examiners as to correct their abusive practices.
I do not want to beat a dead horse on EyeDetect as people are probably sick of this topic considering the exchange over Memorial Day. However, do you think that EyeDetect is going to be the NEW polygraph and take over. I know that sounds strange, but these people apparently have limitless amounts of money behind them and could very well purchase the market share. I suspect that is what sent Lafayette fleeing for cover is the very threat of that premise.
It would be interesting to get feedback from Joe, the poster from TX, as he is in the PSCOT business and from what have read done a pretty good job of fending off the TAPE and APA examiners as to correct their abusive practices.
Posted by Tom Tesslin
- May 30, 2017, 09:58 PMDan:
CORRECTION. I meant to say not ANY, but examinees that should test out innocent, and end up testing out Deceptive. I wonder if EyeDetect has kept track of that, or if it even matters to them. In previous posts it was stated they only sell the licenses and do not know what other people are doing. I find it hard to fathom that they just FEDEX these gadgets off and that is the end of it.
In any of Harris's post does anyone recall what is required to be a Certified EyeDetect Examiner, and what is the educational level required. I think I read in some internet article it was designed to be used by someone that is basically a customer service person or clerk.
CORRECTION. I meant to say not ANY, but examinees that should test out innocent, and end up testing out Deceptive. I wonder if EyeDetect has kept track of that, or if it even matters to them. In previous posts it was stated they only sell the licenses and do not know what other people are doing. I find it hard to fathom that they just FEDEX these gadgets off and that is the end of it.
In any of Harris's post does anyone recall what is required to be a Certified EyeDetect Examiner, and what is the educational level required. I think I read in some internet article it was designed to be used by someone that is basically a customer service person or clerk.
Posted by Dan Mangan
- May 30, 2017, 09:54 PMTom, this is mainly about money. So, an APA "position paper" about EyeDetect might well be in the works.
IMHO, the polygraph indu$try will soon be fighting for its life.
Nothing would surprise me.
IMHO, the polygraph indu$try will soon be fighting for its life.
Nothing would surprise me.
Posted by Tom Tesslin
- May 30, 2017, 09:41 PMDan:
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.
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.
Posted by Dan Mangan
- May 30, 2017, 09:13 PMQuote
I wonder how many EyeDetect examinees are going to test out Deceptive when he or she was really innocent?
My hunch is about 50% -- roughly the same as polygraph.
Posted by Tom Tesslin
- May 30, 2017, 09:06 PMDan:
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.
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.
Posted by Dan Mangan
- May 30, 2017, 08:55 PMInteresting. I've worked the PCSOT racket since 2007.
From what I've seen, it's a license to steal.
Collateral damage? F*ck those clowns.
They're just pervs/sickos/skinners.
EyeDetect will destroy polygraph
From what I've seen, it's a license to steal.
Collateral damage? F*ck those clowns.
They're just pervs/sickos/skinners.
EyeDetect will destroy polygraph
Posted by Tom Tesslin
- May 30, 2017, 08:46 PMConverus 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.
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.
Posted by Dan Mangan
- May 30, 2017, 07:49 PMWandersmann, you have no idea how much I appreciate your observation.
I can't speak to EyeDetect with any authority, but if you knew what really goes on within the polygraph indu$try, you'd be stunned.
Make no mistake: Polygraph "testing", from what I've observed in the field, is largely a racket.
Science? Forget about it.
It's all about money.
I can't speak to EyeDetect with any authority, but if you knew what really goes on within the polygraph indu$try, you'd be stunned.
Make no mistake: Polygraph "testing", from what I've observed in the field, is largely a racket.
Science? Forget about it.
It's all about money.
Posted by Wandersmann
- May 30, 2017, 02:13 PMQuote from: danmangan on May 30, 2017, 08:47 AMThat said, when a capitalist starts talking about making the world a better place through lie detection, watch out.
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.Posted by Dan Mangan
- May 30, 2017, 08:47 AMIt doesn't take much heat to melt a snowflake, and it was not my intent to do so.
Neal added an interesting albeit self-serving perspective to the discussion. I hope he returns, in part so he can address some of the issues he dodged earlier.
That said, when a capitalist starts talking about making the world a better place through lie detection, watch out.
Neal added an interesting albeit self-serving perspective to the discussion. I hope he returns, in part so he can address some of the issues he dodged earlier.
That said, when a capitalist starts talking about making the world a better place through lie detection, watch out.
Posted by Tom Tesslin
- May 29, 2017, 11:04 PMArk:
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.
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.
Posted by Ex Member
- May 29, 2017, 09:48 PMQuoteI guess we should watch the Converus website to see if ARK gets appointed to the Advisory board?I would last a week before being escorted to the gate.
Posted by Tom Tesslin
- May 29, 2017, 08:38 PMDan:
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?
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?