Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Is Richard a Liar?
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 12:04:34 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 69
Message-ID: <v22pv3$1006v$5@dont-email.me>
References: <v18e32$1vbql$1@dont-email.me> <v1m2hc$1ijhr$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1m31m$lbo4$1@i2pn2.org> <v1m4et$1iv85$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1m5co$lbo4$2@i2pn2.org> <v1m71h$1jnpi$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1m7mh$lbo5$5@i2pn2.org> <v1mb8f$1kgpl$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1mkf8$lbo5$7@i2pn2.org> <v1mkmm$1q5ee$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1na6f$1ugl0$1@dont-email.me> <v1o67n$24f4c$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1q1ie$2l40t$1@dont-email.me> <v1q9fp$qb0p$1@i2pn2.org>
 <v1qmq8$2prs6$1@dont-email.me> <v1qouc$2qb2s$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1vbpd$3gbc$1@dont-email.me> <v1vslr$7enr$1@dont-email.me>
 <v1vuor$24b2$1@news.muc.de> <v20027$865j$1@dont-email.me>
 <v200oo$843p$1@dont-email.me> <v200u2$8dd9$1@dont-email.me>
 <v202k0$8q16$1@dont-email.me> <v20654$9o07$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2086v$a4tr$1@dont-email.me> <v208db$a6jn$1@dont-email.me>
 <v20ak6$an12$1@dont-email.me> <v20b6v$akk9$1@dont-email.me>
 <v20eg6$bn7u$1@dont-email.me> <v20eqg$bki0$2@dont-email.me>
 <v21raa$ovek$1@dont-email.me> <v22l7j$us8f$1@dont-email.me>
 <v22nnm$14b7c$3@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 19:04:35 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0b1a5f306bf9a6832a28841b3fc547c1";
	logging-data="1048799"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+UzFcozYGj5B62rT0vMjOk"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:g0X7yZWBH8E00YmjmLDsHEpujk8=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v22nnm$14b7c$3@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 4569

On 5/15/2024 11:26 AM, joes wrote:
> Am Wed, 15 May 2024 10:43:47 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>> On 5/15/2024 3:21 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>> On 2024-05-14 19:42:08 +0000, olcott said:
>>>> On 5/14/2024 2:36 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>> Op 14.mei.2024 om 20:40 schreef olcott:
>>>>>> On 5/14/2024 1:30 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>> Op 14.mei.2024 om 19:52 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>> On 5/14/2024 12:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Op 14.mei.2024 om 19:14 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>> On 5/14/2024 11:13 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Op 14.mei.2024 om 17:45 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/14/2024 10:42 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 14.mei.2024 om 17:30 schreef olcott:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/14/2024 10:08 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In comp.theory olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/14/2024 4:44 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-12 15:58:02 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/12/2024 10:21 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-12 11:34:17 +0000, Richard Damon said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/12/24 5:19 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-11 16:26:30 +0000, olcott said:
> 
>> What I said was not precisely correct. None-the-less claiming that I am
>> wrong without knowing the subject matter is the
>> reckless-disregard-of-the-truth
>> of defamation cases and dishonest.
> Haha what?
> 
>> Claiming that I am wrong knowing that no single valid counter-example
>> proving that I am wrong exists is dishonest and defamation.
> So sue me.
> Besides, we do know a counterexample.
> 

It is reasonable for me to construe that this is a lie
until the counter-example is provided.

It is legally defamation to say that I am incorrect
knowing that no counter-example exists.

It is legally defamation to say that I am incorrect
knowing that one does not know the subject matter.

*THIS IS THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS POST*
*THIS IS THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS POST*
*THIS IS THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS POST*

Message-ID: <v0ummt$2qov3$2@i2pn2.org>
On 5/1/2024 7:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
 > On 5/1/24 11:51 AM, olcott wrote:

*When Richard interprets*

*Every D simulated by H that cannot possibly*
*stop running unless aborted by H*

as *D NEVER simulated by H*

Richard is saying
for all "D simulated by H" there exists at least
one element of "D NEVER simulated by H"

Can this be an honest mistake?

-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer