IFF. Apparently we need one of these thingies.
This post is terrible. Slow news day. I followed sigmoidal’s link to a Monty Python farce, causing extensive brain damage. Anyway, here it is.
As you say, what comes next.
LF moderation has not figured out how to handle trolling and outspoken people with emotional responses. Dewey is called by Planet Rossi the “ventriloquist,” though there is nobody speaking with his voice but him. He is the only participant in LF discussions who has direct knowledge of Rossi v. Darden, and of Rossi going back years. Others are depending on what they have read, except possibly for the Rossi Socks or Puppets, of course; if they are Rossi or are getting information directly from him, they would represent the “other side.” Dewey is actually an investor in IH, apparently going back to the original stock offering in 2012, so he has suffered a direct effect from Rossifiction. He is, for some matters, an eyewitness, and for others he has more direct access through people he knows.
Any discussion forum which is interested in participation by the knowledgeable must understand that some of these will not be dispassionate and detached. It is still possible to create and enforce civility rules — as the Court will certainly do in appearances before it. But LF staff have not developed procedures that work for creating civil discussions, and was quite uninterested when such were suggested last year, and even torpedoed efforts to introduce elements of it. THH went on with a prediction or idea of where LF discussion might be going:
This thread goes dead with only trolls posting and even the few OCDs like me find it boring repeating the factual troll-spray too often.
It is like nasty hospital bugs, the anti-troll facts lose potency after a while cos they are indisputably true and everyone ignores them and looks for something else to argue about.
More facts = more troll-spray. It will come.
There are common Planet Rossi tropes that have been repeated over and over. They have been countered with fact, but that does not stop them from being re-introduced. What happens when a forum goes this way is that normal people stop reading it. On-line fora, over time, if not managed well, become havens for some particular point of view, as espoused by the most attached and fanatic.
As I have been going over and over case documents, I’m finding myself less and less motivated to continue the study and analysis. The appearance to me is that I’m becoming so familiar with the body of evidence that “what happened” becomes quite obvious — whether or not it is so decided by a judge or jury. I have definitely spent more time with the evidence than the Judge. There are plenty of unresolved details, but the core, underneath, is not at all a mystery.
Some things that are of great concern to those arguing tenaciously and furiously will not be resolved by the case, unless someone pulls a Wabbit out of the hat, and this late … that is probably not going to happen. Rossi v. Darden is not going to prove that Rossi has Heat, and it is not going to prove that he does not have Heat. Rather, the concerns of the Court and Jury will be the contract, the alleged presence of fraud in how the alleged Guaranteed Performance Test was set up, and possibly about how that Test was conducted.
The initial Rossi claims of fraud on the part of Darden and Vaughn seem to have no evidence behind them and were legally very shaky to begin with, as David French pointed out in his early interview on the case.
I think THH may have been talking about the “facts” dumped on the discussion by Ahlfors, see Misc Mash. But there are many others who create confusion. There are others who simply err, and the Forum format does not create correction of errors, generally. There is no culture that demands accuracy. Some will correct their errors, some not, but the posts then stand forever. And if the effect that THH suggests does arise, the topics become toxic. The last word is not always the best, and there is no process for determining an overall community consensus, which, if there were enough participation, might actually be meaningful.
Dewey, if you and your affiliates are the future of LENR than LENR has no future is my opinion.
Trolling. Evidence-free, provocative and insulting opinion. Watch what develops!
CALM DOWN ALL OF YOU! TAKE THIS AS A WARNING TROLLS ARE NOT WELCOME, NO MATTER WHAT THEIR POV.
Anonymous trolls don’t care about warnings, thetruemonty is a trollname, and Alan Smith does nothing but shout, all caps yet!
The way the Forum works, people read posts in sequence and the page layout often means that they have not seen further responses. So if someone sees the trolling post, they may not see the “warning” and exhortation to calm down coming after it. The Forum software makes managing this difficult, but it could still be done with clear procedures and a self-restraining administrative community — and that works best with transparency in almost all situations.
Trolls do not care about logical consistency. Their purpose is to poke and prod, not to negotiate some intellectual consensus. TTM’s insinuation was not in response to any specific claim about IH and “the future of LENR.” I might as well introduce this here, the Maryanne Macy coverage of Rossi v. Darden, early on.
As you can tell from that article, Macy has had extensive contact with Rossi, from early on. It appears that she met Rossi in Rome at the time of ICCF-15 (2009). I met Macy at ICCF-18, with her husband, Michael Melich, and we have talked on the phone; unfortunately, as one might easily understand, much of the conversation was confidential; by the time I talked to her, I knew more about Rossi v. Darden than she did (because I was focusing on this), but, of course, she has depth and history. Her article is well worth reading and considering carefully, and if you don’t know what praeteritio is, look it up.
She knows Rossi and she knows Darden and Industrial Heat. The article ends with a review of existing work in LENR. There are many initiatives described, and Industrial Heat is either supporting them, or, where possible, they know what is going on with them. If there is promising research that needs funding for development, they are a major source, but not the only source.
you specifically proposed that people must explain that when they word ‘scam’ or ‘scammer’ they must explain how this was true of Rossi for the past six years. I am asserting that your proposal is absurd. As evidence,
Sigmoidal in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (art 11) “Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.” see e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence
So anyone accusing Rossi to be a scammer should be able to prove that in Court.
Writing that Rossi is a scammer “by evidence” or with generic or ill based statements have no sense.
I have written that ele may be Rossi, but what is clear is that ele writes from a Planet Rossi position, repeating many standard Rossi tropes. Here, ele is clearly clueless about the meaning of a “penal offence,” and what “charged” means there. It refers to criminal charges. “Scam” is not necessarily a criminal act. Rossi is accused of fraudulent representation, which is not necessarily a criminal offense. Standards of proof for conviction of a criminal offense are high, but for a decision regarding a civil offense, the standard is preponderance of the evidence, not “proof.”
Again, an obsession with “proof” is associated with Rossi and his legal offense and defenses. “Anyone,” however, is not subject to the jurisdiction of the court. If someone libels another — which is often misunderstood as well — they can be sued for damages, if there are any. Law on this is complex, but, bottom line, someone calling Rossi a scammer in LF discussions is at minimal risk of being sued successfully.
The only people who will be convinced by ele’s arguments are those who are firmly attached to Planet Rossi.
Dewey Weaver wrote:
Try as they might – Planet Rossi cannot re-write history. Rossi is a CONvicted criminal.
Funny how history tends to repeat itself.
Now, the problem. This is provocative, even though it appears to be true. Rossi has often claimed that the convictions were all set aside and fines refunded, or the like, but this is not supported by Mats Lewan’s account, nor have I ever seen evidence showing his being cleared.
I suspect that IH knows more, they may have actually sent an investigator to Italy. This is largely irrelevant, “scammer” is justified by the facts that have come out in Rossi v. Darden, facts acknowledged by Rossi (most of them) and supported by documentary evidence. Rossi lied. He might also have perjured himself, but that’s much more difficult to prove. He obviously led — or attempted to lead — IH to believe that the “real customer” was Johnson Matthey, and for obvious reasons.
Many people? Fine, please name three then. Two?
I.e., Jed had written: “Many people who know him well despise him. One of them, an otherwise mild mannered academic type, told me he would like to beat the crap out of Rossi. I am talking about people who worked with Rossi for months. They know him much better than you do.”
Fifteen or 20 I guess. People in the U.S. government, NASA, I.H. and places like that. You can learn their names easily enough. Just about everyone I know who had the misfortune of working with Rossi hates his guts.
The “mild-mannered academic types” are not likely to allow their names to be announced, and “hates his guts” is a very extreme reaction, more or less in line with Jed’s common melodramatic style. Jed, of course, in 2011 and later, was writing his opinion that Rossi had something real, basing this on comments from people he knew who had seen demonstrations and who were convinced.
So Dewey what comes next ? which new facts can you report if any ?
You say that (IH) had a Vision but in fact I have not seen any Industrial or Business Plan from IH. Can you show us one ?
There is no Plate called Rossi. That is your mere invention, and actually was probably invented by a PR company .
Planet. Dewey did invent the term, but it serves an obvious purpose. The “PR company thing” is a Planet Rossi trope, it takes a special mindset to think that someone would be spending good money to guide blog commentary in the present context (where public image will have almost zero effect on anything important). That would be good money after bad, because “Planet Rossi,” as a term, will generate no cash value for IH, and if anything, Dewey’s comments could be doing more harm than good. He is not speaking for IH, but for himself.
I use “Planet Rossi” because it is short and conveys a clear meaning: the complex of ideas that are idiosyncratically related to Rossi and RossiSays, and, then, the people who predominantly express those ideas. “Idiosyncratic,” by the way, doesn’t mean wrong. Rossi seems to have thought so when I pointed out his usage of kWh/h as a unit of power. He went so far, then, as to claim that kW (cancelling out the “hour” units) was wrong, and then he cited a physicist as someone to read to understand this. The fellow he cited made the same point, and Rossi’s expert Wong did the same.
Just about everyone I know who had the misfortune of working with Rossi hates his guts.
That’s not true. Seems that in Sweeden people is still working on Rossi Technogy and industries are inVolved. 🙂
Sic. Ele’s English seems to vary greatly in quality. I suspect more than one person may be involved with the account. (Perhaps he has become more senstitive to the sock puppet arguments, so he has someone assist him, sometimes.) Ele is here posting non sequiturs, irrelevancies. What people in “Sweeden” are doing is irrelevant to those whom Rothwell knows. It is, again, a Rossi practice to assert an irrelevant argument when challenged, and this shows up in the arguments over the Motions for Summary Judgment. People working on “Rossi Technogy” in “Sweeden” is RossiSays. Maybe. Maybe not.
Remember, Rossi claimed to have a functional 1 MW plant in 2011. If he had a functional 1 MW plant, he had individual devices of 10-20 kW, and was able to make many of them. This was almost ready for market; ready, on the face, for an investor to support the final product engineering. Further, Rossi was not nailed to IH. IH did have a right of first refusal as to activities outside their territory, but … all that would mean is that if someone else offered Rossi money for a new license, they could require him to sell it to them instead by making the same offer. More money for Rossi. As well, Hydrofusion was an existing license grandfathered in to the License Agreement. So … where are the products on the market? It’s been six years since Rossi promised them. ele continued:
And also about list
NASA has cited Rossi technology as promising.
IH is a part of the trial,
and “People in the US…..” is to generic please specify.
Jed wrote “People in the U.S. government, NASA, I.H. and places like that.” What someone might have said in the past would not be relevant to what they feel now. Rothwell merely made a statement about how some people feel, who had worked with Rossi, and IH worked more intensely with Rossi than any other example I can think of. I still don’t think they “hate his guts.” Dewey might possibly feel that way, but he is not “Industrial Heat,” he merely works with and for them, in a certain capacity. Not as a blogger, I think.
It is definitely not against the law! That would be a violation of free speech.
There is no need for a trial. Every sensible person can see that Rossi is a scammer, and in every free society anyone is free to say that.
For example in Germany it is strict against the law, also and especially in the WWW:
“Anyone who is convicted of a libel is to be punished with imprisonment for up to two years or with a fine according to § 186 StGB.”
The domain http://www.lenr-forum.com is registered in the US (San Francisco CA.) maybe that there is another law, but I would prefer that no person, cooperation, or organisation is accused here as long as there is no judicial verdict.
Jed is an American and is referring to U.S. law. See the Wikipedia article on Defamation. Jurisdiction can be a problem with the internet, but aside from that, most of the U.S. does not establish defamation as a crime; it is a civil offense, i.e,. someone can be sued. Truth is a defense. The issue here: “scammer” could be defamation, but remember that Pons and Fleischmann sued a newspaper in Italy over being called frauds or the like, and lost.
Accusation of others on LENR Forum of reprehensibility has been common. I think Rends has done it, but it’s not important enough to spend time trying to find it.
Jed responded to this, not quite correctly. In some states, libel is still a criminal offense. However, “criminal offense” requires mens rea, the intention or knowledge of wrongdoing. For a civil offense, mens rea is not necessary.
Why does nobody mention that big daddy O’Sullivan wiped the last straw of IH just off table!
All spoliation (destroy of evidence, e-mails…) claims (as predicted to 100%) were burried and the final Jury date has been agreed on.
But as THH defines it, this is Troll spray. You must now wait for the non Troll, alternate facts…
Wyttenbach appears massively confused, as seems all too common. O’Sullivan is the Magistrate, not the presiding Judge (That’s Altonaga). There was a recent motion to Strike filed by IH that was denied by Altonaga, but that was for technical reasons (and I have some doubt about the denial’s propriety, but it may not matter). O’Sullivan did reject the IH Motion for Sanctions re Spoliation, but IH has appealed, arguments are being completed, and that appeal is pending. There is to be a hearing on 5/23/2017. From our Docket page:
05/05/2017 0287.0 PAPERLESS NOTICE of Hearing on 283 Plaintiff’s APPEAL of Magistrate Judge to District Court Order – ECF No. 266, 285 Defendant’s APPEAL of Magistrate Judge 266 Order to District Court Denying Motion for Sanctions Based on Spoliation: Motion Hearing set for 5/23/2017 10:00 AM in Miami Division before Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga. The Court has reserved the rest of the day for this hearinig. [sic] (ps1)
This would also not be the “last straw.” Spoliation may still be asserted at trial. Rossi may have great difficulty convincing a jury that there was a megawatt heat exchanger that he removed without informing IH and giving them an opportunity to inspect it.
Rends gave his opinion about … libel? … and was then asked to make it clear this was his personal opinion:
*At the request of the admin and moderators team, I announce that this is my purely personal opinion.*
Rends was incorrect about the domain registration. The registrar is in Denmark. The site is, however, hosted on Cloudflare.com, which appears to be in San Francisco. The owner, David Nygren, is in Sweden (which does have criminal defamation laws).
Wyttenbach dug his hole deeper, insisting that O’Sullivan was “the Court.” Because O’Sullivan is labelled “the Court” in hearings, I’d guess. He speaks for “the Court” in his hearings, but his decisions may be appealed to Altonaga, and we have already seen her overrule him. Wyttenbach speaks with great confidence in his correctness. That’s a hazard of having a PhD, and assuming that because you did well in one field, you must be really smart in others as well. Maybe. Often, not.
As a Jury I would decide to run the plant in a certification LAB and if any COP measured is higher than the contract asks for, IH has to pay.
Wytte (not) has no clue about what juries do. He may be accustomed to an inquisitorial legal system, where a judge might do something like that, but the contract simply was not followed, so COP is irrelevant. Rossi could buy back the Plant and sell it to someone else, if IH consented, and it could work spectacularly, and this would not change anything about the lawsuit.