One poster created 52 percent of our 208 threads. A concern? Do we have to beg?

[John Iacoletti]

Dallas Morning News reporter Hugh Aynesworth was watching the motorcade on Houston Street as he heard shots fired. He immediately ran to the TSBD building - he said he was there within a minute of the shooting - and started to interview the people there. Here is his account of seeing Brennan:

It doesn't really matter how Aynesworth interpreted it, Brennan himself said that he didn't see a rifle discharge.  And Brennan didn't identify anyone in the lineup he attended either.  Everything else is just revisionist excuses.

[John Iacoletti]

Using John I's nutty standard, no one saw John Wilkes Booth shoot Lincoln.  They just heard a shot and turned at that instant to see Booth pointing a smoking gun at Lincoln's head.

This false equivalence again.  Nobody just heard a shot and turned at that instant to see Oswald pointing a smoking gun at anyone's head.

[Tom Scully]

Unfortunately, 86 threads (of 202 total) have been created by one poster with a penchant for never correcting an
inaccuracy or conceding, even in the face of overwhelming posted evidence, that he is mistaken.

......

Slow down,,,,,keep your thread creation proportional....do we have to beg you?

The total percentage of his threads vs the entirety of existing threads of this forum is 42 percent.
(177 threads in this forum section, 13 threads in photograph forum, and 12 threads in video forum)
.....Is there some higher percentage that this thread author would have to
reach before readers would regard this forum as his forum....or that he is actually vandalizing this forum as a consequence
of his disproportional thread creation?

Slow it down....do we have to beg you? is not one poster's 86 threads of 177 total threads in this section of the forum a
spam attack on this forum? Two more threads puts his total in this forum section above 50 percent of all threads here.

[Tim Nickerson]

Slow down,,,,,keep your thread creation proportional....do we have to beg you?

The total percentage of his threads vs the entirety of existing threads of this forum is 42 percent.
(177 threads in this forum section, 13 threads in photograph forum, and 12 threads in video forum)
.....Is there some higher percentage that this thread author would have to
reach before readers would regard this forum as his forum....or that he is actually vandalizing this forum as a consequence
of his disproportional thread creation?

Slow it down....do we have to beg you? is not one poster's 86 threads of 177 total threads in this section of the forum a
spam attack on this forum? Two more threads puts his total in this forum section above 50 percent of all threads here.

Tom, if Duncan doesn't mind him posting his screeds here why do you? They quickly drop down the tier, unresponded to, and disappear from view. Nobody here pays attention to him. LNs or CTs.

[Tom Scully]

📬

?Whether you agree with him or not, researchers such as Rob Caprio for example, took the sensible initiative and saved his own research, and he is now reposting them back on the Forum.

All other members are free to do the same.? ?Duncan MacRae

You did not post a link back to your quote because there is no available post including that quote. Just use the forum search with the word,
example to confirm that you cannot come up with a link to that quote.

If it was posted at one time, maybe it was deleted because of buyers remorse. Even if it was an ethical, honest poster who authored 42 percent
of the 203 threads in this section of this forum, it would still be too many, too soon. But, that is not even the case, here....
Is it?

It appears that Caprio no longer wishes to hang his hat on the Zangretti story.  Nice work Tom.

Our asset to the forum posted this "gem" a few hours ago on another thread.

Quote from: Rob Caprio on February 23, 2018

Incorrect. I have never seen you cite the evidence. You can't because you either don't know it or you realize that it doesn't support your claims. There is no reason not to cite evidence IF you have it. This is simply a cop out because you don't want to admit that you have none.

[Tom Scully]

Then ask Duncan. It was in the thread started by Mary Jo Wong in which she was asking why the forum was not backed up. You are more than welcomed to repost your stuff, but why bother?

Why don't you show me one post that actually supports anything regarding the JFK assassination. Go ahead. I don't recall one post of yours that taught me anything about the case or the evidence.

You are like Paul May in your obsession with me. It is all about nonsense too. Nothing groundbreaking. Why don't you focus more time on learning the evidence?

Your opinion is worthless to me in case you have not noticed. I wouldn't have to do all this work if the board wasn't hacked, and the chances of that being done by a LNer are much higher. So blame them.

You owe it to yourself to research your claims before posting them.....unless you are incapable of doing it.
According to records of this forum.....or should we rely on your linkless claims, Mary Jo has authored no threads and has posted only
in one thread. Do not be so confident anyone is all that thrilled with you authoring nearly half of all of the threads in this, the most
popular section of this forum. Have some consideration, it is not all about you....slow down....do we have to beg you?

I'm not saying your "permission" to overwhelm this section of the forum with rehashes of your old threads was never posted. I am
pointing out that it is not currently available and there is objection to your indifference about the freakishly disproportional imprint you
are currently afflicting this forum with, aggravated by your record of refusing to admit you are wrong and attacking those who proved you were
wrong.

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=91

[Denis Pointing]

Then ask Duncan. It was in the thread started by Mary Jo Wong in which she was asking why the forum was not backed up. You are more than welcomed to repost your stuff, but why bother?

Why don't you show me one post that actually supports anything regarding the JFK assassination. Go ahead. I don't recall one post of yours that taught me anything about the case or the evidence.

You are like Paul May in your obsession with me. It is all about nonsense too. Nothing groundbreaking. Why don't you focus more time on learning the evidence?

Your opinion is worthless to me in case you have not noticed. I wouldn't have to do all this work if the board wasn't hacked, and the chances of that being done by a LNer are much higher. So blame them.

I actually read that post by Duncan you're quoting Rob. There's no denying it's true. But to accuse the LNs of hacking the forum is an utter disgrace. You should withdraw and apologise for that disgusting and groundless allegation.

[Martin Weidmann]

I actually read that post by Duncan you're quoting Rob. There's no denying it's true. But to accuse the LNs of hacking the forum is an utter disgrace. You should withdraw and apologise for that disgusting and groundless allegation.

You should withdraw and apologise for that disgusting and groundless allegation.

Dennis,

I take it you agree then, that John Mytton also should apologize to Colin Crow for making a similar claim

Yeah, it's people like you who hack Forums because they can't stand any evidence that contradicts their limited shaky viewpoint.

Colin if you can't handle the heat get out of the kitchen.

JohnM