A Message to Former APA President Don Weinstein

[G Scalabr]

Mr. Weinstein,

Thank you for posting to this forum. You can rest assured that none of your posts will be deleted. We value the input of polygraph examiners, especially luminaries in the field such as you. Unfortunately, many examiners tend to cease participating once they end up on the receiving end of a well-reasoned argument. The purpose of this post is to convey my personal request that you not choose to depart in the same manner.

In the thread entitled LAPD Dropping Requirement to Pass Polygraph? you accuse George Maschke of misleading others about polygraphy and attempt to cite Mr. Maschke's creation of this thread as a specific example of this alleged misconduct.  He and others responded, "pulling your card" by effectively demonstrating that the only post that was actually misleading was yours. Certainly the language struck by the Civil Service Commission is justification for George to begin a thread "LAPD Dropping Requirement to Pass Polygraph?" In other words, his post asks "Is the LAPD dropping the requirement that those who submit to mandated polygraph screening actually pass the 'test'?" and invites discussion of the matter.

I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you didn't see the question mark after George's post and the paragraph struck by the Civil Service Commission. As a show of good faith, please consider elaborating on the "routine" way in which Mr. Maschke has misled anyone about polygraphy.

Furthermore, I would be interested in your opinion as to why current American Polygraph Association President Skip Webb declined to participate in a moderated debate against Mr. Maschke to be held on the website of Chicago Tribune columnist Eric Zorn. According to Mr. Zorn, Mr. Webb would have been given the last word--yet he declined. One would think that Mr. Webb would have relished the opportunity to set the public straight and clear up any misconceptions created by the "misleading" information put out by Mr. Maschke and others who explain that polygraph "tests" are unreliable and easily defeated by countermeasures.

I eagerly await your response.

[pete155]

I have no comment as to whether or not LAPD requires the actual passing of a polygraph as a requirement to being hired.  I would comment about whether "LAPD Dropping Requirement to Pass Polygraph?" is a question.  If that sentence were to be spoken and there were intonation on the word polygraph, then yes it would invoke the interrogative mood.  But the written sentence LAPD Dropping requirement to Pass Polygraph is a statement (declarative sentence).  Simply adding a question mark for punctuation is grammatically incorrect.   For this statement to be a question, a "helper verb" is required.  Is LAPD dropping requirement to pass polygraph?  
 I don't wish to comment as to whether Mr. Mashke was intentionally trying to deceive anyone.  I just want to clarify the issue.  The first time I read it I missed the question mark and thought LAPD actually was dropping the polygraph requirement.

[George W. Maschke]

pete155,

It is not uncommon practice to omit helper verbs from titles and headings.