The Cover-Up: How Was Movement from Phase I to Phase II Justified?

[Charles Drago]

Meow.

First, I suggest that there is a 'hypothesis committee' of two to three persons.

Lauren, I think you know that I respect and honor your contributions here. So PLEASE don't be offended as I now characterize your "hypothesis committee" idea as something more suited to a Politburo wet dream than the DPF I helped found!

Second, there is one hypothesis at a time for consideration to cut down on the workload.

For whom and for what should we dumb down this forum?

What is so FUCKING difficult about the concept of "hypothesis" that it requires explicative structures and processes?

Third, the hypothesis has to meet certain standards before going up: it must possess a statement of relevance[.]

To WHAT? Who becomes the God of Relevance?

"Certain" standards? Whose?

t must convince the 'committee' that it is ready to go up[.]

Calling all commissars ... calling all commissars ...

Fourth, all responses are subject to moderation around clarity, relevance, politeness, etc.

"POLITENESS"???

FUCK politeness.

Did the shooters say "Excuse me" before they blew Kennedy's fucking brains out?

Fifth, at some point, the hypothesis is subject to evaluation: is it considered proved, has it been falsified, and/or how can it be strengthened and made even better (this is the most important one, in my view).

Who is going to do the judging?

Whose consideration will carry the most weight?

This is growing more insane with every passing word.

Finally, a final statement is posted summarizing the progress or lack thereof regarding the hypothesis. The thread is then marked as closed.

On WHOSE authority?

For example, Charlie Drago's hypothesis about PDS's theory about the two-stage cover-up could have used editing before it went up.

My friend, I pray that you live long enough to see me permit my work to be edited by anyone who posts on this forum and would agree to take part in this ... I don't know what to call it ... tribunal.

Frankly, I am still not clear about what was at stake and whether it could have been verified or falsified.

Not my problem.

To put this another way, Charlie, when would you have been satisfied that your hypothesis was proved or disproved?

Within the context of this thread: NEVER.

It never was my intention to have it "proved or disproved."

Oh, I forgot, I am putting you into time out for a week or a month or a year.

I'd appreciate it if you share with me the reason why you use the term "time out."


If any such system is initiated on DPF, I will see myself out the door. Permanently.

Is everyone clear on this?