Ripperologist Magazine #169 - July 2021

[JeffHamm]

It changed colour when I clicked on it, but then what?
Nothing happened, I clicked again, and again.
All the little window does is change colour.

I didn't get an email, nothing downloaded from anywhere.

How do you know it worked?

When I clicked on the subscribe button it took me to a page where I filled in my name and e-mail, and clicked submit or subscribe again, and it flashed up a "thank you for subscribing" message.

I did this via a desktop computer using Chrome. I know web pages look different on phones and perhaps tablets? If you're not using a computer but some other device, maybe that's the issue?

And there was an option to download the current issue (which on the site was #160) and a menu button to choose for back issues, which are a series of zip files containing multiple issues each. They can take a while to download as they're large files.

- Jeff

[Herlock Sholmes]

Being an old fashioned guy, I print mine out.

That bag?

It was you!!!

[drstrange169]

As I told Fanny, it's only got cigarettes in it.

[Wickerman]

When I clicked on the subscribe button it took me to a page where I filled in my name and e-mail, and clicked submit or subscribe again, and it flashed up a "thank you for subscribing" message.

I did this via a desktop computer using Chrome. I know web pages look different on phones and perhaps tablets? If you're not using a computer but some other device, maybe that's the issue?

And there was an option to download the current issue (which on the site was #160) and a menu button to choose for back issues, which are a series of zip files containing multiple issues each. They can take a while to download as they're large files.

- Jeff

Yes, I expected the page to change, but nothing happened.
I'm on a desktop, I wonder if it's the Browser, I'm using Firefox.

[Herlock Sholmes]

As I told Fanny, it's only got cigarettes in it.

[JeffHamm]

Yes, I expected the page to change, but nothing happened.
I'm on a desktop, I wonder if it's the Browser, I'm using Firefox.

Maybe? Firefox is supposed to be reliable. Do you have another browser you could try though?

- Jeff

[Abby Normal]

amazing edition of ripperologist. well done to everyone involved. the articles and photos are great! beautiful tribute to Robert Linford and Pat and Chris research is a tour de force!

[Wickerman]

I could Jeff, yes. I also have Chrome, Explorer, and a couple of others.
I don't really want to bombard Jon with subscription requests, he has already listed me.
When I first joined the BNA I was on Firefox, but it wouldn't refresh the newspaper pages, I had to used Explorer just for BNA, so I know it can be temperamental, that problem doesn't exist now though.
Anyway, I'm subscribed now thats what matters.

Have a great day.

[Elamarna]

Maybe? Firefox is supposed to be reliable. Do you have another browser you could try though?

- Jeff

Could it be a pop up blocker is turned on in Firefox Jeff ?

Steve

[JeffHamm]

Could it be a pop up blocker is turned on in Firefox Jeff ?

Steve

Maybe. I usually blame gremlins.

- Jeff

[Fisherman]

drstrange169 transferred the debate over to another thread because the moderator asked everyone to do that in Post #12.

So, I will clear up a few points about this matter before moving on to another one. You write that then moderator has asked to transfer the discussion about the review of my book in Ripperologist to another thread, but that is wrong. What the moderator wrote was this:

Everyone else - please limit this thread to a discussion about the content of the latest issue of Ripperologist Magazine.
All other discussion of Christer’s theory that’s not directly relating to Steve’s review should be made in one of the countless other Lechmere threads existing and active on the boards.

The discussion we are having IS of course directly related to Steves review and therefore it should be conducted on this thread. it will facilitate finding it in the future, should anyone be inclined to look for it.

[Fisherman]

It should also be added that Dusty on another thread reiterated that me writing that the corroborated story does not appear until we have Robert Paul on stage (before that, the one source we have ios Lechmere, who is uncorroborated) would somehow mean that everything I wrote after that passage needed to be verified facts. That is of course not true - I have already pointed out top Dusty that what I meant - and I am sure everybody understood it with a few possible exceptions - was that the addition of Paul on the scene resulted in we could check for corroboration in what was afterwaards said. Of course, Paul could for example no corroborate what Lechmere told Mizen if he was not within earshot, and of course, two men can produce lies inbetween them, so corroboration does not have to mean that truth will always follow.

If Dusty is interested in any further discussion of this, IŽd suggest that be begins by telling us whether or not he thinks it is a good idea to review a book written by a person that you have been at war with for the longest time, calling that persona liar and stating that he is too biased to see clearly etcetera. I find it a matter of principle not to allow for such a process, but maybe Dusty disagrees about that too?

Anyway, I am back to bring up another matter, relating to Robert Paul and his testimony, and I am placing it under Suspects: Charles Lechmere: How sure was Paul?

[drstrange169]

Just for the record, I will not be commenting on Lechmere/Cross thread for awhile, for reason that will become apparent later. Suffice to say, in light of some new accumulated evidence, I've down graded Lechmere from the person of interest category I previously had him at. For me, significant portions of Christer book are no longer relevant.