Stephen Poole's latest hoax

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Stephen Poole, infamous for his embedded systems hoax, has done it again. This time, though, it's personal, so I feel compelled to comment.

On the Debunking Y2K bulletin board, he makes the following statement in the course of an attack on me:

I know Steve Heller.

To put it bluntly, this is a lie. I have never had the misfortune to meet him or even to speak to him on the telephone, and I doubt that we have even exchanged emails.

If I ever do have the misfortune to run into him, I will not shake his hand or otherwise indicate that I consider him a member of civilized society. As far as I'm concerned, he's as bad as CPR ... to be shunned by all rational, intelligent, and sensible people.

Unfortunately, I don't expect him to retract this deliberate lie, as I know his type (although not him personally). Of course, he also won't apologize for his scurrilous attacks on me either on the Debunking board or on this board under one of his pseudonyms. However, if he does apologize, it will not be accepted. I detest him and everyone else like him, and wish him the very worst of luck.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), January 28, 2000

Answers

What he said was, "I know Steve Heller. He and I share friends and contacts. His collapse into Y2K Doom both surprised and disappointed me. His behavior since the rollover continues to disappoint. This is nothing but a "I'm smart and you're not!" weenie-wag contest; an attempt by him to regain respect lost by his lapse in complete Doomism."

He didn't say you were personal friends. He said you share them.

-- Die Fledermaus (shadow@alliance.org), January 28, 2000.


Steve: you are starting to sound shrill. Why don't you go take a vacation or something. Almost everything you post in here is confrontational. It is unbecoming.

-- JoseMiami (caris@prodigy.net), January 28, 2000.

To say "I know Steve Heller" means that you have at least an acquaintance with him; some personal contact. He does not know me, as we have never had such an acquaintance. He could have said "I know about Steve Heller", and that would have been true. But the statement he made is false, and everyone who has any respect for the truth knows it.

JoseMiami: When I want your opinion on how I should deal with slime who make false statements, I'll be sure to ask for it. Until then, it's really none of your business. I'm sure you can understand that.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), January 28, 2000.


Jose, there's something to be said for the notion that it's appropriate to condemn the "kickee" for saying "Damn", while intentionally saying -nothing- about the "kickor".

Yes, Jose, there's something to be said for that notion, but it's nothing that can be said in mixed company.

I'll be polite, and suggest that you blow it out your ass.

-- Sluggo (sluggo@your.head), January 28, 2000.


I knew Stephen Poole in the biblical sense, as he was my bunky for 2 weeks!!

-- Porky (Porky@in.cellblockD), January 28, 2000.


Steve,

On another thread you said:

The usual trolls are attacking me to try to distract attention from my point. To them, I have one comment: I was wrong about Y2K's initial impact, but you are worthless scum. Tomorrow, I may very well be right about something else, but you will still be scum.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), January 28, 2000.

Aren't you doing the same thing that you were criticizing others for doing? I noticed that you did not mention the other comments Stephen made about the BCD overflow question, only attacked him.

-- Steve (sron123@aol.com), January 28, 2000.


This whole thread is none of my business. So why am I reading this?

-- dirty laundry (hanging@outto.dry), January 28, 2000.

When I read that statement on Bonkers, I took that paragraph to mean that Poole KNEW Steve personally. It almost sounded like they had been friends at one point. Thanks for clarifying Steve. Thanks for lying, once again, Poole.

-- kritter (kritter@adelphia.net), January 28, 2000.

say man in defense of Jose you made it everyone's business when you posted it to a public forum and solicited responses.

You are starting to sound like being wrong is getting to you. You apear to be in a downward spiral. It's time for you to take a break and cool out.

You are really kicking out some bad vibes.

Remember what goes around comes around.

-- Johnny (jljtm@bellsouth.net), January 28, 2000.


Okay, I'll comment on Poole's BCD comments:

In THEORY, on two-digit BCD data, YES, it would "overflow" (actually, CARRY is the correct term, not "overflow;" the result of the add would be hexadecimal 9Ah, which is undefined under BCD).

Actually, this is wrong for processors that have BCD instructions, where the answer would be "00" with a carry. But either way, he's indicating that Cherri's simplistic "don't worry, be happy" position is incorrect.

In PRACTICE, it ain't that simple. Most small embedded processors don't have any concept of what a "BCD" is; there are no "BCD instructions." On these processors, adding 1 to 9 will techically cause an "overflow" on any variable which is PROGRAMMER DEFINED as "BCD." The "overflow" must be corrected by other instructions. (The Intel family has things like the "DAA" -- "Decimal Adjust Accumulator" -- instruction, but many small embedded processors do NOT.)

In other words, in practice, he is agreeing with me that Cherri's statement that "computers use binary, so we don't have to worry about decimal arithmetic rules" is incorrect. So why is he attacking me? Because Cherri's on his side: a "debunker".

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), January 28, 2000.



Remember what goes around comes around.

Indeed it does. I'm just helping it come around a little faster for a particular con artist.

My rule is this: Anyone who treats me fairly will get the same in return; anyone who attacks me will get the same back. I don't believe in lying down to be stepped on by scum.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), January 28, 2000.


Steve, I would have done the same.

Josi, just shut up, will ya.

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), January 28, 2000.


Steve- you made a choice. You choose to be influenced by the opinions of countless computer experts working on the mainfraims and with embeddeds. You decided to disregard the statements made by the Clinton Administration ( the fountain of truth, indeed). You decided in the face of uncertainty to not expect the dice to come up snake eyes on the first roll, and be prudent. So big deal- the dice rolled lucky and things are better than expected. Thank God the embeddeds are not as bad as they could have statistically been. So you decided to listen to good folks and mistrust Koskinen. Where, tell me guys, was the big mistake here? Get real folks, Y2K is a test run for something bigger someday. Stay with the good counselors, keep being cautious. The issue is not the rollover, the issue is the rest of our lives. Steve- let them criticize, decent folks appreciate doomers. Don't even waste your time and emotional energy on them.

-- carolyn (carolyn@luvmyhub.com), January 28, 2000.

Kritter, yeah I went over there and read it too. It sounded to me like Poole was an old friend or at least acquaintance of Heller. Im an engineer and had exchanged a few emails with Steven Poole last year. He is probably the most arrogant person I have ever communicated with. He tried often to put "words in my mouth" as in button holing me into some kind of stereo type he had of doomers. He would read about half of my notes back to him and take off on a tirade before understanding my point. Maybe it was because he was in such a hurry to get to others on his bboard. More fun to make fun of people when others can read your witty comments, you know. Obviously, I finally gave up.

-- DannyBoy (Easy-to-beat-up-doomers-now@new.year), January 28, 2000.

My rule is this

Steve,

Thats the problem, YOUR rule. No one has to follow your rules, no one cares about your rules or anything else you choose to dictate to them.

Unless you are the new messiah, your wishes and demands mean nothing to the rest of the world.

It appear as if you were in a position where you were considered a little "smarter" than those around you, it went to your head and you came to feel that you were the authority in other areas as well.

I can just picture with your chest puffed out, giving everyone who will listen your opinion on everything, telling them how impressed some headhunter was with your resume and background. You came to believe it yourself, that you were right, that you were a step above everyone else, not allowing any opposition to what you said (I'm right! Just show my resume to any headhunter and see!). Then along come Y2K, you come to a decision as to how it will turn out and anyone who disagrees with you is WRONG! They have to be wrong because you are always right!

Along I come, refusing to post my resume (never had to use one, they came to me) and telling anyone who would listen that the embedded situation is not as bad as commonly thought. My spelling is horrid, sentence composition is even worse, I MUST be a moron because of that so whatever I say about embedded is wrong too.

And I disagree with you! Bad, that was bad enough, but I see your buttons and push them at my leasure.

That is enough to get anyone upset, but then to top it off, it ends up that I was correct about the outcome of Y2K and you were wrong.

You gotta admit that is like having the knife in your back twisted. How can life be so unfair? All of those people you were so sure needed you to tell them how to think see that you were wrong, very very wrong.

Well you can watch and wait for me to post something that you can use to destroy my credibility! Good idea, salvage an ounce of pride, put me down publicly to "bring yourself up".

Only one problem with that is, I am not a phony and am not lying. It must be difficult to realize your own mind has betrayed you. That your thinking was wrong, that you were not as smart as you knew you were.

As I have said before, if you feel the need to convince others that you are smart, you are really trying to convince yourself.

I really am beginning to feel sorry for you.

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), January 28, 2000.



Steve,

I agree with your position as stated it your post that started this thread. Polly/liberals always expect that no matter what they say about people they disagree with they will be treated with respect.

They get away with it because most people ascribe to standards of decency and civilized behavior and do not descend to their level. All interaction with them should be stopped as soon as it is realized what they are.

Power, even only over emotions, is what they seek. Power and recognition. Deny they these and they will wither on the vine. Just remember that intelligent disocurse is impossible with them.

-- Mr. Pinochle (pinochledd@aol.com), January 28, 2000.


I am wondering why you are bringing conflicts from the debunking board onto this forum. Why should anyone care what Poole is saying? If we were interested in what those people were saying, we would go there and read their board.

-- Dave (dannco@hotmail.com), January 28, 2000.

off off

-- (off@off.off), January 28, 2000.

Cherri: My spelling is horrid, sentence composition is even worse, I MUST be a moron because of that so whatever I say about embedded is wrong too.

I've never said you are a moron, but I'll defer to your knowledge on that topic; I won't even ask you to prove it. How's that for being fair?

As for the rest of your usual nonsense: it's clear to anyone who can read and think that you've given up on answering the question. That's good enough for me. Bye bye, Cherri.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), January 28, 2000.


You have never met me, but you certainly know *something* of me, if only through my writings.

If he had said that he knew of me, then I would have had no argument with that statement, but that wouldn't have helped his "argument". In fact, he said he knows me, in a context clearly implying personal knowledge. If he merely meant that in the sense that everyone who has read my writing "knows" me, there would have been no reason to mention it, as it would not have given a "personal touch" to his comments, implying that he has the right (or special knowledge) to criticize me because of this presumed relationship. In fact, he doesn't know me, so he is lying. Again.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), January 28, 2000.


You are right, Steve, I stuck my mouth in this thread and it does not concern me. I apologise. Please feel free to carry on the combate without my interferance.

-- JoseMiami (caris@prodigy.net), January 28, 2000.

There you go again, dictating what people think.....

I answered the question, you goof, or can't you tell?

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), January 28, 2000.


Steve: you are starting to sound shrill. Why don't you go take a vacation or something. Almost everything you post in here is confrontational. It is unbecoming.

-- JoseMiami (caris@prodigy.net), January 28, 2000.

To say "I know Steve Heller" means that you have at least an acquaintance with him; some personal contact. He does not know me, as we have never had such an acquaintance. He could have said "I know about Steve Heller", and that would have been true. But the statement he made is false, and everyone who has any respect for the truth knows it.

JoseMiami: When I want your opinion on how I should deal with slime who make false statements, I'll be sure to ask for it. Until then, it's really none of your business. I'm sure you can understand that.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), January 28, 2000.

Wait a minute jackass. You made it our business whe you decided to post your bitch fest on a public message board. Steve, you're an ass, no way around it pal.

-- Rob (scooter@aol.com), January 28, 2000.


From: Y2K, ` la Carte by Dancr (pic), near Monterey, California

I wouldn't exactly call it a "hoax," either.

-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage), January 28, 2000.


Steve,

You are a pathetic, whiny jackass. You sicken the term "doomer" with your allegiance to this forum.

-- Becoming (sick@stupidity.here), January 28, 2000.


Steve, you are the poster child for the old saying "It is better to remain silent and appear ignorant than to open your mouth and remove all doubt". Perhaps you should spend some time in reflective thought. You are like a gambling addict. You simply cannot accept your losses and walk away from the table. It was your uncontrolled desire to appear smarter than everyone else that lead to your current position of ignorance. Are you so blinded by vanity that you cannot read your own posts and see how ridiculous they are?

-- for real (for@real.com), January 28, 2000.

"becoming:
You sicken the term "doomer" with your allegiance to this forum.

This makes no sense, but then why should it? That would break the chain of ignorant, incoherent comments from the peanut gallery. Keep up the good work!

"for real":
Steve, you are the poster child for the old saying "It is better to remain silent and appear ignorant than to open your mouth and remove all doubt".

No, actually Cherri, Poole, and all of you trolls who are "defending" them are the poster children for that saying. You are the ones who are exposing their ignorance and bias for all to see. But that's okay, I wouldn't expect you to understand. That would require you to look at the facts, not merely depend on which "side" someone is on.

A more general comment: Anyone with a functioning mind can see how desperate the "debunkers" are to be right about everything, especially when they are wrong. I've already admitted that I was wrong about the effects of the rollover, but your "side" apparently can't admit ever being wrong about anything, other than of course any pre-"debunking" concerns about Y2K. This exposes your psychological state as one of terrible fear and anxiety about everything in the world. A psychologically healthy person can admit error, because it doesn't shake his world view to do so, but you, of course, cannot.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), January 28, 2000.


As a side note, Cherri has explained her answer about the binary/decimal arithmetic overflow question, and I now understand what she was trying to say and agree with it. Sorry about the misunderstanding.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), January 28, 2000.

If anyone "knows" Mr. Poole here, it's me. We must have traded at least a thousand posts, in our late-night battles here many months ago.

Now, where did I read it, csy2k or deBUNGers, a few weeks ago, that Mr. Poole CET, said gooy-bye to Y2K? So what is he doing still posting?

Just one more BULLSHIT line, from our old "friend" I guess.

Sorry to insult children, but some people's kids...

Tick... Tock... <:00= ...

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), January 28, 2000.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ