When I engage with a topic, beginning to read about it and comment, researching points, being corrected, and all that, there comes a time where I have a relatively deep knowledge. And then people show up with obviously much less knowledge, but totally certain of their position and contemptuous of others.
This post is about a plea for civility and a defense of Rossi, and my response looks to the roots of belief.
On Quora, there is a Top Writer who has been banned at times for saying the obvious obvious, because Quora has a strict BNBR policy: Be Nice, Be Respectful, and they want people to report disrespect, not answer it; which is entirely contrary to normal social media practice, and it can take time getting used to.
Quora used to have community moderation, but it is now all paid Staff, and they are obviously overworked. If a comment, in complete isolation, looks uncivil, it is treated that way. I was warned once for calling a user what he had called himself in his profile. They don’t care, they don’t have time for subtleties like context. And that’s the way it is there. Some of the best writers on the planet….
So, here I was on lenr-forum, and it was increasingly obvious that administration was clueless. But only one moderator routinely stuck his foot in his mouth and trolled for anger and used his tools erratically and with apparent bias. I didn’t know about the others, who were mostly silent and relatively inactive. So now I know, and it’s all good in that I won’t be risking my content there, but will build it elsewhere.
SelfSustain just wrote this:
Comment on lenr-forum.
I had previously responded to a reasonable post by SelfSustain, at
Comment on lenr-forum.
It’s an impassioned plea for civility, including civility toward Andrea Rossi. I very much appreciate the intention, but the plea is partly founded on what is either counterfactual or is not known as fact. So here I examine it. I will presumably be off the ban today, but don’t intend to write on lenr-forum.com, but anyone may reply there, quoting any of this, if a link is provided, and comments are possible here as well, I’m still setting this up. I tested account registration, it works. Today’s post:
I would like to make a statement that is not in Abd’s defense or against him.
On this forum, users often make accusations and statements that are equal or worse than the assertion of someone being an idiot. They might not use quite as blunt of a word, but instead may use sentences or paragraphs to convey a meaning that is just as hostile. In my opinion, these more eloquent denouncements can be worse than any one word slur. However, very rarely — if ever — has anyone been banned for piecing together such a proclamation. Maybe one word insults should be forbidden due to the instant feelings of anger and bitterness they can create. But in my personal opinion, almost every day there are numerous posts made that are far worse, by both “sides” of this conflict. Of course if such posts were all banned, there would be no discussion here at all.
To be completely open, I’m going to make such a statement now.
My usage of “idiot” was, in a effect, a test of the system, because it was embedded in insult, on both sides, insult far deeper than “idiot,” which, in context, would be how very smart people talk to each other. It is never meant literally. It was a standard riposte, invited by the user’s question, giving an obvious answer. In real life, any intelligent person would have laughed. But what about the context? There were questions and comments intended to cast high discredit. The outraged response was blatantly fake, the response of a troll, and he was gleeful at the ban. Nothing done. Nothing done about many other examples, far worse than “idiot.” At Cal Tech, we called each other “warm bodies.” I.e., able to tell the difference between light and dark, was the standard definition. This was possibly the brightest set of undergraduates on the planet.
All uncivil posts could be banned. Banning posts is not the same as banning users, and it is possible to do this while respecting user rights. When I deleted content as a WikiMedia Foundation sysop, I always made the content available to the user. Many do that, in fact, on request, unless there is strong reason not to do it. Appeal is always possible.
If policies are set up, administration becomes easier. But setting up policies is work, and very often, administrators can’t be arsed. “We don’t need no stinkin’ policies, we are already going to do the Right Thing.” In fact, creating policy should not be their job, it properly belongs to two: the Owner and the Community, and, for Wikipedia, the WMF decided to defer it entirely to the Community, except where legally compelled.
The fact that some individuals accept the idea of Andrea Rossi’s world totally falling down upon him due to the fact he has absolutely no evidence of any kind to share in his defense is absurd. For this to be true, he would have had to intentionally started the planning of the one year test with the intention and desire to spend his final “golden years” in prison. Because if he were to have zero evidence to refute any of the seemingly damning accusations of Industrial Heat, he would clearly be guilty of a whole host of crimes. If he had hypothetically set out to deceive IH, he would not have done so without insuring he would have something to defend himself with.
Andrea Rossi is a public figure of high relevance. He filed a lawsuit accusing other public figures of something much worse than insanity: fraud. At this point, Rossi has not presented any evidence beyond the initial filing, and many people, based on that, were calling Industrial Heat a criminal conspiracy to suppress Rossi’s work. So commenting on Rossi is not quite the same as commenting on users here. Some users here are, to some extent, public figures, but special courtesy should be extended to such who are willing to engage in discussion. Such users, too, can be and should be subject to content restrictions, but this can be done without insult or injury to them. It simply takes some understanding of how to facilitate conversation in the presence of high conflict. That is missing from site administration, and it doesn’t want to learn.
The idea of Rossi’s world falling down around him was introduced yesterday by someone who actually has met Rossi and who, through Industrial Heat, interacted with him for years. It is well known and accepted — by friends! — that Rossi is “eccentric,” with at least a paranoid edge. The preponderance of the present evidence shows a conspiracy, but no claims have been made of criminal conspiracy by Industrial Heat. Those come from others, less restrained, some quite angry. For example, a scientist has commented, who invested some years of work, if I’m correct, attempting to confirm Rossi’s results, and I think he suffered negative health consequences from exposure to nanoparticle nickel — it is very toxic stuff, and allergies are developed.
I have been explaining the process of the lawsuit, where the court has just rejected Rossi’s Motion to Dismiss the counterclaims (which is where civil fraud is alleged). So we should see an Answer from Rossi in less than two weeks now. Unlike some others, I have drawn no conclusions from Rossi’s lack of answer to the allegations, so far. It’s normal legal process. I have been explicit: what I’ve written is based on the preponderance of the evidence as we have it, which is now partly balanced, not fully. That is, Rossi made his first shot, and if he had stronger evidence than he showed, on critical points, I wonder why he did not show it then. Then IH answered and counterclaimed, with a pile of evidence, some of it quite damaging on the face, not mere allegations by IH. What appears from the IH filings is a conspiracy that is, quite as suggested it would be, insane. I cannot imagine that his intention was to spend his final years in prison, and, at this point, prison is not on the table. It could be, perhaps, but this won’t be up to Industrial Heat, most likely. It would require evidence stronger than what they have, perhaps. What they have is sufficient for civil fraud, where decisions will be made on the preponderance of the evidence, not “beyond a reasonable doubt” as with criminal fraud.
So I do suggest insanity as a possibility.
Regardless if Andrea Rossi has serious personality “quarks” or other issues, he is not a late stage Alzheimer patient.
I have never mentioned Alzheimer’s, nor have I seen anyone else mention it, so, SS, you are being overreactive, not grounded. Rossi is obviously “high functioning.” However, there are high-functioning people who are, nevertheless, insane. Insanity means exactly what you imagine he couldn’t have done because it would be crazy (“suicidal”).
Initiating a lawsuit with Industrial Heat with no evidence of his story of what took place in Doral would be clearly suicidal, legally speaking.
Rossi’s own claims in the lawsuit demonstrate that he did not consult counsel with regard to a $100 million Agreement (if he did, his story that he was deceived is a lie). Lack of preparation is quite plausible, given that. He had previously done things that would have enraged and driven away an ordinary investor, so perhaps he was emboldened.
As an example, he claimed a chemical manufacturing process was taking place. I find it implausible to the extreme (even in the worst case of the entire test being a scam) that he would have not brought in at least had some piece of manufacturing equipment that could have plausibly utilized steam to allow for a chemical reaction. Regardless if one pound, a hundred pounds, a thousand pounds, or ten thousands pounds of product had been produced, it would have been LITERALLY ASKING TO NEVER SEE THE OUTSIDE OF A PRISON CELL UNTIL PASSING AWAY FROM OLD AGE for him not to have some photo documentation of the manufacturing taking place — even if it was only sporadically or on a small scale.
SS, the insanity defense? As well, “Gee, sorry, we never got around to setting up that process. We meant to!”
How about this: “You mean there wasn’t a megawatt? That rat Penon! I trusted his measurement set-up and Darden approved it!”
Rossi might have this and he might have that. He might have made some attempt as mentioned. He might even have a giant Wabbit to pull out. But how likely is this? Sure, if you want to wait, that’s obviously your privilege and choice. Others won’t. And the world is moving on. All the fuss about the Evil Industrial Heat has apparently had no effect on the International Society for CMNS, which obviously trusts Industrial Heat, overall. People are continuing to attempt replication, and possibly even encouraged, because their work won’t necessarily be considered a failure merely because it doesn’t generate kilowatts. Yet.
The same goes for the employment agreement with James A. Bass. It would have been beyond total stupidity (if the whole test was a giant scam which I do not believe it was) for JM Products Inc. not to have an employment agreement or contract specifying details of the equipment he would be managing and the duties to be performed. The same goes for the many other issues. Even if he planned for the whole test to be a total farce from the start (which I do NOT think is true) he would have prepared documents and other forms of evidence — even if fake — to PROTECT HIMSELF before launching a lawsuit.
And the invoice requests from JM Products would show more realistic figures. The Penon reports would match Rossi’s records and claims. And we could go on and on. An obvious one: there would have been duct work from the customer area to a vent. Some of this would have been cheap and easy, and obviously wasn’t done. Yes, SS, it’s crazy!
If Rossi presents a Wabbit, we will see. If not, his lawsuit is probably dead, and will be dispatched in short order through Summary Judgment. And then the countersuit will proceed. What Dewey Weaver wrote is an obvious possibility: Bass or Fabiani or Johnson will simply tell the truth. Bass is the most likely to do this. He may not have been hit yet with interrogatories or requests for production or a deposition order, but the 3rd party defendants’ Motion for Dismissal will be heard in short order, and then, assuming the suit is not dismissed, Discovery will proceed and people who may have been tempted to lie or continue a lie will discover that pretense in a meeting is one thing, lying under oath is quite another. The latter can, indeed, send you to prison.
Self-Sustain went on:
I can’t imagine him thinking to himself near the end of the test before filing the lawsuit papers, “Gee whiz! This is going to be so super easy! I’m going to sue Industrial Heat for 89 million dollars and additional damages, and they are not going to even investigate any aspect of my year long test! No, I don’t have any need to make sure I have some form of evidence, even if conjured up illicitly, to protect myself when they start fighting back. I’m so glad my lawyer and I know better than to think we’ll be asked to provide any hard evidence of the claims I’ve made.”
His lawyer, who he is deeply connected with, would have never allowed the lawsuit to be filed unless they had covered at least some of their bases, to some extent.
The lawyer he knew well was Johnson. I don’t know when he engaged Annesser, but there are signs that Annesser was not familiar with the documents and filed in a rush (and the filing was the day before the payment fell due. Ah, calendar days vs business days!)
My thinking is that Rossi’s taking advantage of the fact that there are multiple people out there who truly think he is “insane.” By not posting any evidence to refute the worst accusations of Industrial Heat or allowing the co-defendents (Bass, Fulvio, Penon, etc), I think he is utilizing a strategy to try and make the other side think he has nothing to back up any of his statements — zero, zilch, nada. He’s letting them think he has never had anything to back up a single claim, doesn’t have anything, and never will have anything. At this point, I’m guessing one reason for *some* of his sock-puppeting is to further this concept, that he’s an old man that’s either always been a total looney toon or who has been sniffing heavy metal dust and solvent fumes for FAR TOO LONG.
And what did he gain by this? Yes, an appearance of insanity or fraud may have been part of his long-term strategy, but before Rossi v. Darden is dismissed or goes to trial, all evidence must be on the table in Discovery. In what we have seen of Discovery, it appears he is fishing desperately for something that might bolster his case, including things that would actually be of no relevance (such as whether or not they had $89 million available when they signed the Agreement). If Rossi had strong evidence, presenting it with the Complaint — even just alleging that it existed — what would he have lost? Surprise? That doesn’t work in court. IH has not, so far, clearly presented their strongest argument, and I’m a little puzzled by that, but … they will in Discovery, for sure. (They did actually present it by implication, this is about the lack of a signed consent to the GPT, as explicitly required.)
I’m not saying he has enough evidence to win his case. Although I won’t say his chance of winning is ZERO, I don’t think it is likely. But simple logic must dictate that he would not have sued (with the assistance of his attorney) unless he had *some* quantity of evidence to provide when he thought the moment was right. Without a shred of documentation, he would be guaranteed defeat. Even if the whole test was a scam, he’d have a MUCH greater chance of getting money from IH by trying to hoax a positive “small scale” test result. Or, if his technology *never* worked and the E-Cat has been a hoax from the very start, he could have tried to con IH into buying the “Quark” or some other variation of the technology from him.
Attorneys advise but clients decide. Obviously, we don’t know what went on between Rossi and Annesser — and this will probably never become public — but Rossi almost certainly insisted on going ahead ASAP.
Personally, I don’t think the test was a total and pure hoax (even if he may have fudged numbers or committed other acts of a dishonesty). My thinking is there was some level of excess heat, some chemical manufacturing equipment, and some level of production being performed — at least for a portion of the time. My guess since I’m NOT a lawyer and have ZERO legal experience and NO legal knowledge whatsoever (SO TAKE THIS WITH A GRAIN OF SALT) is that he’ll wait to reveal this information until the VERY LAST MINUTE. Even if it is no where near strong enough for him to win, it will provide the strongest “shock value.”
“The very last minute” is when his responses are due to interrogatories and requests for production, and deposition. He’s going to be asked what he has, and if he doesn’t disclose it, he — and his attorney — could be sanctioned. At this point, my guess, IH is waiting until he’s had the opportunity to disclose, to file a Motion for Summary Judgment. There is, I believe, a winning argument, it’s that obvious. If there is a real Wabbit, though, all bets are off.
Perhaps he will consider this last minute, on the way to the metaphorical “gallows” release of information his “MAGNUM OPUS.” He could pull a few wabbits out of his hat and shock everyone with something we don’t expect. Again, I’m not saying something that will win him the lawsuit, but something that could provide the test with some limited degree of legitimacy and give the reality of his technology (not the performance of the one megawatt plant) a boost.
I do not know what is ultimately driving Rossi. I’ve never met him.
Some on Planet Rossi imagine that a public demonstration, or, even stronger, true independent validation of Quark-X will turn everything around. Not with the lawsuit! It would be irrelevant! Rossi v. Darden turns on the Guaranteed Performance Test, and if there wasn’t one, and even if the Doral plant actually produced a megawatt, it’s legally meaningless. And then IH would have evidence that Rossi did deliberately withhold the technology. He created a genuine mess for himself. Truly, it’s crazy, because as matters stood, he had the money from the Agreement, probably most of it, and was free to develop his technology, say in Sweden. By filing the lawsuit, he has almost certainly shut off many otherwise viable possibilities for proceeding. Fraud or not.
I for one am convinced his technology is real, if a single watt of excess heat ever came from the shipping container in the ware house or not! And I don’t think he has forgotten anything; conversely, he has more knowledge and experience than ever before. And if he is really pushed against the wall due to this lawsuit, he may surprise all of us.
In future comments, I’d suggest exploring that “conviction.” What’s it based on? You don’t have to have a “reason.” It could be pure intuition. But what is it? Where did it come from?