The Arcana Society of Quinn Tyler Jackson - another intellectual abortion by Quinn

[Neilist]

If two people on the list had not said they read the paper and that it was worthy of publication, I would not have chimed in on sci.math and said so. You know that ... or you don't know anything about me at all. I don't always say stuff people agree with -- but when I say something, I say it in good faith. Andrew Beckwith -- eccentric as he is -- came out and confessed to being one of the two. Neilist knows that. Beckwith's PhDs are in physics and mathematics, I believe ... can't recall from where. Yes -- he's quite the character -- but there's one. A whack of published papers behind 'm if recollection serves me right.

So essentially this is all about my not revealing the name of the second math person who read the paper and said it stood. If you belong to a group, and one of the rules of membership is that other members' info is to be kept confidential -- it is unethical to reveal that information.

So don't tell me about ethics or dishonesty. Beckwith (and another fellow -- a non-mathematician) self-identified on sci.math. The other fellow did not elect to do so -- so his name ain't coming from me. Just because Neilist's nonsense skips like an old disco record doesn't make it so. Just because he is trying to extort me into doing things his way or the highway ... well ... I'm a stubborn fuck when it comes to doing what people tell me just because they tell me.

More lies from Quinn - he says that I "know" some guy Beckwith came forward.  Unless Quinn can back THAT up, he weaves yet more lies.  Let Quinn dredge up a sci.math post about it, because I don't remember or "know" any such thing.

Amazing!  Quinn represents that he heard that a paper was reviewed by a "closed list", so Quinn passed on such rumors as facts, with the backstory being a crank James Harris who was seeking recognition from the mathematical community by publishing a math paper.

And only now is Quinn fessing up that one of the reviewers of a mathematical paper in the alleged "closed list" was "a non-mathematician".

Quinn also says he knows that Beckwith is "eccentric" and a "character", but Quinn still sees nothing wrong with making such representations of a "review" by an eccentric of a mathematical paper as though they are facts.

The eccentricity of this Beckwith fellow and the review of a non-mathematicians casts a harsh light on this supposed review of the paper.  And also casts a harsh and damning light on the Quinn's bullshit high-IQ society behind the alleged "closed list".

Of course, years ago, Quinn did not characterize to sci.math that this reviewer Beckwith was eccentric, nor of the other reviewer being a non-mathematician.  Quinn's "closed list" excuse conveniently hid such details from real mathematicians involved in the review issue.

The poor sorry and forlorn mathematicians on sci.math should have been told such "facts" and details to take into account in their judgement of the alleged review of the Harris Paper by an alleged "closed list".

But the really irksome aspect is that when such representations of facts and personal knowledge were challenged, Quinn became evasive, condescending, and insulting.

Here's the simple reason - Quinn was protecting his friend James Harris, his precious high-IQ society, and/or Quinn's ego with his divine right to pronounce "facts" as unquestionable.

Truly, with all of this hidden "facts" and the "eccentric" nature of Beckwith, the whole "closed list" issue illustrates the elitist and intelllectually dishonest nature of Quinn to selectively make representations, including spreading rumors and alleged facts not in his personal knowledge, with Quinn feeling ABSOLUTELY NO NEED to support or corroborate his representations.

Unethical to violate the "closed list"?  If this were true, why is Quinn being so unethical with everything else, disparaging Beckwith now, instead of back then, or even disparaging Beckwith at all?  So that Quinn can look good here?  Ha!

Quinn could, and in fact has, pulled statements out of his ass and said they were facts.  Only now is the TRUTH being dragged from Quinn.

And that's what DLTruth is all about, right?

Of course, Quinn is dismissive, because he doesn't want a review of his pitiful and intellectually dishonest behavior.

Whether or not some eccentric named Beckwith came forward does not absolve Quinn of being intellectually dishonest.

Keep spinning your tales, Quinn.  You can't rewrite history -- you can only surpress it, like Big Brother in 1984.

Quinn, you're an elitist fascist!