Who were they?

[Abby Normal]

Here is another post for you to agree with:


But I am clever. Although the gentle man has turned, I did not show my hand true. I apologized, a one off instance, I said, which I regretted and I assured the whore it would never happen again. The stupid bitch believed me.

('Maybrick' diary)


According to Curzan, 'one off' first shows up in 1934, and it means 'made or done as only one of its kind', and it's not repeated - it's a one-off product, a one-off event. Its origins are British, but has been in use in American English since the 1980s.

https://www.michiganradio.org/arts-culture/2014-06-29/the-difference-between-one-off-and-one-of-a-kind

The phrase “one-off” (it’s used as both an adjective and a noun) originated in Britain in the 1930s and appears to be gaining popularity here. It refers to something that is one of a kind or is occurring or being produced only once.

https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2008/11/one-off.html

one-off (n.)

"single example of a manufactured product," by 1927, from one + off. Later given figurative extension. also from 1927



Although the definition of one-off contains the word of, the expression has always been one-off.

The expression is fairly new in American usage. It began as a British expression and derives from manufacturing jargon. Its first recorded date of use is 1934.

https://www.dailywritingtips.com/one-off-is-not-a-new-expression/

A one-off was just a single item, used in particular to refer to a prototype. The first known example appeared in the Proceedings of the Institute of British Foundrymen in 1934: “A splendid one-off pattern can be swept up in very little time.” (The reference is to a casting mould formed in sand.)

https://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-one4.htm

I do not know what your response will be, but I imagine it will be that Maybrick was 45 years ahead of his time, that he was a time traveller, or that he was clairvoyant and used the expression to wind me up, in anticipation of this thread's coming into existence.

you're reinventing the wheel. Lord Orsam has already discovered and dealt with this extensively. but yes, one off and bumbling buffoon are anachronisms that definitively prove the diary to be a modern fake.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Still around BE, but nothing is catching my interest lately.


The Baron

You mean you never noticed my # 346 on page 24 of A photograph of Joseph Lawende in 1899, even though it quoted your # 160 in the same thread?


I quote:


as if the Kosminski described by the Police whether Aaron or not, was not an insane and sexual maniac..


(#160, A photograph of Joseph Lawende in 1899)



Where is your evidence that Aaron Kosminski or any other Kosminski in London was a sexual maniac?


(# 346, A photograph of Joseph Lawende in 1899)

[Iconoclast]

Private Investigator I, can I politely point out that every single possible nuance to be gleaned from James Maybrick's scrapbook has been done to death a billion - nay, trillion - times before the middle of 2023 turned up along with you?

There is not a single mark in the scrapbook that has not been analysed, criticised, and debated to within an inch of its life so you posting on these well-trodden themes just makes you look like the Johnny-Come-Lately that you are.

And when you ask questions along the lines of, "How can it be so?", all you have to do is turn to my brilliant Society's Pillar which will change your life, as it has many a naysayer before you.

Praise be the Lord!

PS The expression one-off was almost certainly in some sort of nascent use by 1888, but the issue is that the juxtaposition off 'one-off' and 'instance' was simply cognitively impossible to make due to the term 'one-off' not yet having gained any traction in the conjoinment with an 'event' rather than a manufactured item. All that said, I would politely remind my dear readers that Maybrick actually wrote "one off" not "one-off". Just saying. Don't shoot the messenger.

[Iconoclast]

Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
eddowes nose was cut off. so was kellys. also, part of eddowes ear was cut off. get your **** straight before you go up against the diary defenders lol

At the same time, you might do some reading and learn how to spell the word 'facts', which unlike the word 'fact', which you appear to have attempted to spell, contains five letters.

I don't imagine for a moment that Abby literally typed those four asterisks. I would suggest that the tone of his comment, couple with the four asterisks (not five), and the fact that he's one of those Yanky boys means that he actually wrote the word 'shirt' but skipped the 'r' and the Casebook algorithm said 'Not on my watch' and turned what he typed into asterisks.

As usual, I will be right - just watch Abby admit it.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Private Investigator I, can I politely point out that every single possible nuance to be gleaned from James Maybrick's scrapbook has been done to death a billion - nay, trillion - times before the middle of 2023 turned up along with you?

There is not a single mark in the scrapbook that has not been analysed, criticised, and debated to within an inch of its life so you posting on these well-trodden themes just makes you look like the Johnny-Come-Lately that you are.

And when you ask questions along the lines of, "How can it be so?", all you have to do is turn to my brilliant Society's Pillar which will change your life, as it has many a naysayer before you.

Praise be the Lord!

PS The expression one-off was almost certainly in some sort of nascent use by 1888, but the issue is that the juxtaposition off 'one-off' and 'instance' was simply cognitively impossible to make due to the term 'one-off' not yet having gained any traction in the conjoinment with an 'event' rather than a manufactured item. All that said, I would politely remind my dear readers that Maybrick actually wrote "one off" not "one-off". Just saying. Don't shoot the messenger.

You may.

I had already made it abundantly clear that I would welcome polite remarks rather than those of the kind to which I have become accustomed.

The fact that someone else previously pointed out something does not mean that it is somehow wrong when I point it out.

As for your description of me as 'Johnny-Come-Lately', it was made clear to me before anyone said anything about my 'discoveries' having been made long before that my presence on this thread is not welcome.

I refer to:

'But some friendly advice, you might simply want to say "oops, wrong room. Sorry about that" ' (#286 from c.d.)

the friendly advice which obviously is not as friendly as it purports to be, and


'You might regret stepping foot into this world.' (# 288 from erobitha)

which seems considerably less friendly, and


'So, be as smarmy as you want, but you are not up on all the facts.' (# 301 from erobitha)

and

'I assume that he or she is confused...That's what happens when you don't think things through.' (# 329 from Iconoclast)

or

'Can anyone help him or her make sense of the conundrum they just wandered into there?' (# 338 from Iconoclast)


I thought the whole point of a discussion forum is to welcome new contributors, not to tell them that they are unwelcome.

But what is your purpose?

Is it to establish the truth about the so-called Maybrick diary, or is it that you see yourself as

'The one whose mission in life is to defend the Maybrick scrapbook (and the Maybrick watch) against all stupidities, ill-thought out 'arguments', and fashionable misunderstandings.'

I ask why you defend the Maybrick scrapbook by writing

'PS The expression one-off was almost certainly in some sort of nascent use by 1888...'

without offering any evidence in support of your assertion.

As for your description of me as 'Johnny-Come-Lately', if one of us is a 'Johnny-Come-Lately', it is you - a latecomer to the world of polite discussion.

[Abby Normal]

I don't imagine for a moment that Abby literally typed those four asterisks. I would suggest that the tone of his comment, couple with the four asterisks (not five), and the fact that he's one of those Yanky boys means that he actually wrote the word 'shirt' but skipped the 'r' and the Casebook algorithm said 'Not on my watch' and turned what he typed into asterisks.

As usual, I will be right - just watch Abby admit it.

yes i admit it. its a yanky saying.

[rjpalmer]

Trust you to spoil the harmony ...

Good Lord, Ike.

Trust you not to understand the definition of harmony. Cadence maybe, or rhythm...

Or did you mean spoil the harmonious ambiance of the Maybrick forums?

[c.d.]

As for your description of me as 'Johnny-Come-Lately', it was made clear to me before anyone said anything about my 'discoveries' having been made long before that my presence on this thread is not welcome.

I refer to:

'But some friendly advice, you might simply want to say "oops, wrong room. Sorry about that" ' (#286 from c.d.)

the friendly advice which obviously is not as friendly as it purports to be, and

I am afraid that you are wrong, P.I. It was most definitely friendly advice. Your presence on this thread means nothing to me one way or another but it didn't take a clairvoyant to see how it would turn out and now it appears that I was correct.

If you recall, I also advised you not to mess with Ally and we all now how that turned out for you.

As for advice, I can but lead the horse to water etc. etc.

c.d.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I don't imagine for a moment that Abby literally typed those four asterisks. I would suggest that the tone of his comment, couple with the four asterisks (not five), and the fact that he's one of those Yanky boys means that he actually wrote the word 'shirt' but skipped the 'r' and the Casebook algorithm said 'Not on my watch' and turned what he typed into asterisks.

As usual, I will be right - just watch Abby admit it.

Where is the evidence that 'get your shirt straight' is an expression in English anywhere?

I typed it into Google's search engine and nothing came up.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Your presence on this thread means nothing to me one way or another but it didn't take a clairvoyant to see how it would turn out and now it appears that I was correct.

The way it has turned out is that my detractors here are unable to produce any evidence that the adjective 'one-off' was in use in 1889.

That means that the 'Maybrick' diary is a forgery - or had you not noticed?

The way it has turned out is that a small group of posters on this thread who seem to think they own it, and that anyone who sees things otherwise is unwelcome, have been making bitchy comments about me and to me.

Like them, you make it look as though my participation in this discussion has been a disaster.

So let us look at what has actually happened during the 49 hours since I dared to enter this discussion about the Maybrick diary's authenticity.

My very first comment, # 284, received a vote of approval.

My # 298 also received a vote.

So did my # 306.

So did my # 311.

So did my # 317.

So did my # 320.

So did my # 325.

So did my # 332.

So did my # 352.

So did my # 378.

My # 387 received two votes.

RJ Palmer in # 389 wrote about me: 'Actually, he's right.'

In # 406, Abby Normal accepted that I was right on the very point that my detractors here insisted I was wrong.


It appears that you are not correct.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

yes i admit it. its a yanky saying.

Where is the evidence?

[c.d.]

Again, you have missed the point, P.I. I care absolutely nothing about your views regarding the validity of the diary. They may be or not be correct. Again, I don't care. What I meant by I knew how it would turn out is that I knew with virtual metaphysical certainty that you would take a lot of flak for your views. That you would attempt to defend them all the way into dead horse territory. And I knew that you would feel ganged up on and mistreated. And I was right.

You should have no quarrel with me. I am not part of the diary crowd that is giving you ****. I tried to warn you and you didn't listen and now you are caught up in it with no way out.

c.d.

[Aethelwulf]

now you are caught up in it with no way out.
c.d.

That's a bit strong cd. Sounds like poor old pi has been caught up in some heavy shirt.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

And I knew that you would feel ganged up on and mistreated. And I was right.

You are not seriously suggesting that I have been treated fairly and have imagined that I have been 'ganged up on and mistreated'?

[Abby Normal]

That's a bit strong cd. Sounds like poor old pi has been caught up in some heavy shirt.

lol. The shirts are the men that will not be blamed for nothing.