Testing the TK Tar Baby

[picowatt]

I am only repeating information that AINSLIE HERSELF RELEASED INTO THE PUBLIC DOMAIN. Remember how she always says that there are these CONTACTABLE persons and organizations that have vetted her claims? But somehow she always...lately... forgets to give the CONTACT INFORMATION.

These names and phone numbers have been available to ANYONE WHO LOOKS FOR THEM, they were posted by AINSLIE HERSELF in 2007. She refers to them all the time, as you can see from reading her posts.

Most of them were made up by her anyway, or the numbers are bad.

SHE HERSELF GAVE OUT THESE NAMES AND NUMBERS WITH THE EXPRESS PERMISSION AND EVEN DIRECTION TO HAVE THEM CONTACTED.

Sorry to shout... but after all, PW, you did come in rather late to this affair. I have a two page document from Ainslie citing these names and numbers and giving express permission to contact them, and she REPEATEDLY, even so late as YESTERDAY, said that these people are CONTACTABLE -- but of course she omitted the contact information, as she always has SINCE 2007.

So... if you think that posting information that AINSLIE herself has posted, is somehow unconscionable... well, sorry, I disagree.

TK,

Providing only links to information made public is much more appropriate, and even then not always so.

If identities are exposed by others without expressed permission, the use of those identities by others is also not appropriate.  If she has made these names public, then you should have only provided links to her statements or documents wherein these names were made public.

Just as she has recently threatened to expose identities without permission, one cannot know if any identities revealed in the past by her, or anyone else, were done so with permission.

Posting the names and phone numbers of individuals without the expressed consent of those individuals cannot be condoned.  Someone else posting an individual's identity online is not permission from that individual for others to do so.

This is not a legal opinion, but one based only on ethics and morals.  The Golden Rule, so to speak... 

PW



 

[TinselKoala]

TK,

Providing only links to information made public is much more appropriate, and even then not always so.

If identities are exposed by others without expressed permission, the use of those identities by others is also not appropriate.  If she has made these names public, then you should have only provided links to her statements or documents wherein these names were made public.

Just as she has recently threatened to expose identities without permission, one cannot know if any identities revealed in the past by her, or anyone else, were done so with permission.

Posting the names and phone numbers of individuals without the expressed consent of those individuals cannot be condoned.  Someone else posting an individual's identity online is not permission from that individual for others to do so.

This is not a legal opinion, but one based only on ethics and morals.  The Golden Rule, so to speak... 

PW

Here is just one link to a post where AINSLIE recently cited some of the names and their corporate affiliations.

http://www.overunity.com/11675/another-small-breakthrough-on-our-nerd-technology/555/
I guess you can see where she says that she herself urged all and sundry to contact someone.. someone who I forgot to list, thanks for reminding me.


Other links that she has posted have been edited or removed by her. This, as anyone will tell you, is a continuing tactic of hers. She will go back YEARS if possible to edit and change the meanings of posts that she made in the distant past. This is why I've banned her from commenting on my YT video channel... years ago when I caught her trying to remove comments or change forum posts that she made to alter their meanings. You can see her doing the same thing today with her "edits" of the daft manuscripts.

Do you think it is conscionable for her to threaten me... and you... with the revealing of OUR personal identities, when neither of US has posted that info before? To run a forum site with the expressed intent of harvesting and running down IP addresses?

I'm just curious as to how many people you can tar with the same brush at the same time.

[TinselKoala]

All this has happened before, you know. This is an interesting series of posts, starting here:

http://www.overunity.com/9442/rosemary-ainslie-cop17-circuit-a-first-application-on-a-hot-water-cylinder/255/

Executive summary: Omnibus asked Ainslie to name some of the experts who she constantly alludes to. She did.


Quote from: Omnibus on August 12, 2010, 10:42:37 PM

Rosemary,

I'd like to talk to these experts in the art. Name some.

Ainslie replied,

Professor Gaunt and Professor Tapsen (UCT)  - start with them.  I have a whole lot more.

I'd like to talk to these experts, sez he.
START WITH THEM, sez she.

So.. .he does. He looks up the publicly available email for Gaunt and announces his intention to send off an email inquiry.

What follows is extremely interesting. It appears that she encourages checking with these people.... UNTIL SOMEBODY ACTUALLY TRIES TO DO IT.

Then...as now... she freaks out. Read it... it's a hoot, especially considering that it's a threeway between Ainslie, Omnibus, and Wilby.

PW, you don't know Omnibus... but the rest of us do......... it's definitely a HOOT to read this exchange.

[polln8r]

Hi TK,
     I've had some computer issues and haven't been able to post in a while, but I've been wondering how well your wireless units could light up other types of bulbs (CFL's, those fancy LED ones, regular household bulbs, etc.) and whether the supernova mode can be achieved with any of them (or be enough to light up higher wattage bulbs more than expected). And I agree, this subject has indeed been one of the most interesting I've seen here. It is certainly applicable in many areas and there are a lot of things about it that merit a whole lot of research. Very fun stuff to see.

Cheers, I hope you're planning more vids!
polln8r.

[TinselKoala]

Burning in the new unit.