View Single Post
  #72  
Old 12-07-2017, 02:27 PM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 9,117
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
When it comes to disrupting threads, by the way, who would have thought that this is a thread about whether posters with suspects can be trusted?
The answer to that is easy. Yes, of course they can, provided they take a balanced and reasonable approach to the evidence. Trying to make (e.g.) Elizabeth Jackson's abdominal mutilations as similar to Mary Kelly's is not a balanced interpretation; neither is trying to place Lechmere closer to Nichols' body than the records say he was.
Quote:
It seems much more like a thread with the sole agenda of defaming me, at any cost.
You began this thread by personalising the argument and making derogatory comments about me. From the very first post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman
On an adjacent thread, Gareth Williams claims that my suggestion that the Ripper and the Torso killer was one and the same is guided by my agenda, and that I only make the call I do because it serves the Lechmere theory. No other merit is ascribed to my suggestion, the primary reason why I don't acknowledge the significance of the differences Gareth mentions is because I "have an agenda to pursue".

This kind of senseless crap has plagued the boards for far too long. It should go without saying that any poster out here must judge any bid made on it´s inherent quality, instead of trying to hide behind unsubstatiated accusations of the opponent having an agenda to defend.
And this continued in your next post but two after that:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman
Doing Ripperology in that way is compromising yourself very badly. It is one thing to be wary about how people may over- or underrate the value of different pieces of information, based on convictions of theirs. But is quite another matter to make an initial deduction of credibility on behalf of people with suspects, regardless of the inherent quality of what they say. That is indecent, illogical and totally disrespectful.

Gareth has not only violated this rule - he also seems to be proud of it. The only thing he has managed to establish by it is a glaring lack of credibility and fair judgment
Can't you see that it might be the case that it's your own belligerent and high-handed attitude that's the main problem here? More often than not you're the first out of the blocks with the insults, before playing the innocent victim if someone gives you a dose of your own medicine in return.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote