Pc Long and the piece of rag.

[John G]

[QUOTE=Pierre;394840]

Letīs stick to the normal discussion.

Is this a "normal" discussion?

[Pierre]

Is this relevant? How do you know it's relevant?

I wrote:

He wanted it to be blurred.

You wrote:

Source? Hypothesis

I referred to the sources showing us it was blurred, i.e. showing us that they did not interpret the writing in the same way.

If he had not wanted it to be blurred, he had not chosen the type of wall which gives the blurred result.

This is based on the hypothesis that David was right. Remember?

[Pierre]

He might have been in Whitechapel first. Anyway, on what basis do you hypothesize thst he came to Whitechapel to find Kelly?

I base this on several sources. That is why I am bothered with this case now.

[David Orsam]

If he had not wanted it to be blurred, he had not chosen the type of wall which gives the blurred.

That sentence doesn't make sense so you might want to rephrase it.

The point I was making, which you seem to have ignored, is that the author of the writing had no option but to write on a rough surface, hence creating blurring, because there were no blackboards in Whitechapel that night.

If that's too difficult for you to comprehend, what I'm saying is that all outdoor surfaces compared to blackboards are rough in the context of the application of chalk to them.

[John G]

I wrote:



You wrote:



I referred to the sources showing us it was blurred, i.e. showing us that they did not interpret the writing in the same way.

If he had not wanted it to be blurred, he had not chosen the type of wall which gives the blurred result.

This is based on the hypothesis that David was right. Remember?

But of course it can be interpreted in different ways. For instance, one theorist suggested that it alluded to freemasonary, although I don't subscribe to that hypothesis myself.

Why do you say he cared one way or another as to whether the writing was blurred? As it could clearly be understood he had achieved his objective.

[John G]

I base this on several sources. That is why I am bothered with this case now.

I would be obliged if you could supply me with those sources.

[David Orsam]

I base this on several sources.

If all you are going to say in answer to every question on every subject in every thread is that you base your various hypotheses on "several sources" then I really don't know why you bother posting at all Pierre.

[John G]

That sentence doesn't make sense so you might want to rephrase it.

The point I was making, which you seem to have ignored, is that the author of the writing had no option but to write on a rough surface, hence creating blurring, because there were no blackboards in Whitechapel that night.

If that's too difficult for you to comprehend, what I'm saying is that all outdoor surfaces compared to blackboards are rough in the context of the application of chalk to them.

A very practical explanation, David. But do you think your in danger of stating the obvious?

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=David Orsam;394844]That sentence doesn't make sense so you might want to rephrase it.

Iīm tired. Rephrasing:

If he had not wanted the writing to be blurred, he should have chosen another type of wall.

The point I was making, which you seem to have ignored, is that the author of the writing had no option but to write on a rough surface, hence creating blurring, because there were no blackboards in Whitechapel that night.

There were other types of surfaces. There were not just walls with rough surfaces or "no blackboards". And there was another alternative: to abstain from writing on any surface.

If that's too difficult for you to comprehend, what I'm saying is that all outdoor surfaces compared to blackboards are rough in the context of the application of chalk to them.

NO. Roughness has a scale. It is not rough or not rough. Look at the Artisan dwellings writing for instance.

[John G]

[QUOTE=Pierre;394849]

That sentence doesn't make sense so you might want to rephrase it.

Iīm tired. Rephrasing:

If he had not wanted the writing to be blurred, he should have chosen another type of wall.


There were other types of surfaces. There were not just walls with rough surfaces or "no blackboards". And there was another alternative: abstain from writing on any surface.

If that's too difficult for you to comprehend, what I'm saying is that all outdoor surfaces compared to blackboards are rough in the context of the application of chalk to them.

NO. Roughness has a scale. It is not rough or not rough. Look at the Artisan dwellings writing for instance.

But why do you say he didn't choose the wall randomly? It seems to me that any wall that he could have written a message on would suffice.

[David Orsam]

A very practical explanation, David. But do you think your in danger of stating the obvious?

I hope so.

[Pierre]

I would be obliged if you could supply me with those sources.

I will oblige you when this is finished, John.

[Pierre]

But of course it can be interpreted in different ways. For instance, one theorist suggested that it alluded to freemasonary, although I don't subscribe to that hypothesis myself.

Why do you say he cared one way or another as to whether the writing was blurred? As it could clearly be understood he had achieved his objective.

But "freemasonary" is a large instituional organisation!

This is not about such an organisation, it is a particular, idiographic history, it is about biography and not about organisations.

Do organisations have preferred victimologies?

[David Orsam]

If he had not wanted the writing to be blurred, he should have chosen another type of wall.

But firstly, as I've suggested, he wouldn't have cared if the writing was a bit blurred or not (especially as it was inevitable it would be).

Secondly, I'm suggesting that all walls would have created a blurring effect because the only suitable surface for chalk is a smooth surface like a blackboard and there weren't many of those around that night in Whitechapel.

[John G]

I will oblige you when this is finished, John.

Then I fear I'm going to have an awfully long wait!