I thought it was against board rules?
"No advertising on the forum, of any kind, without prior approval from either Frank or Kyle. Repeatedly linking your site or blog without prior consent is considered advertising"
It is irritating to those who do not wish to subscribe to that site. But you know that. That is why you do it.
Do the rules not apply to you?
outstanding content and perspectives that often delve deeply into the issues...unlike the "Tabloids" like the NY Post, FOX etc....plus all staff are held to clearly written standards of conduct, and when in rare occasions they are violated, there are consequences...not so with the others I mentioned.
(no message)
while you're at it...re-read all the other Open Forum rules...
Hey if you guys have an exemption just say so. Maybe Ops told you that you were untouchable.
(no message)
that sort of behavior very often here, now do you? ;-)
btw, I'm guessing it will be a sub-zero day in Hades before Baron apologizes for his latest false accusation of me...it is what it is... rules for everyone else, but none for him...
(no message)
quick to accuse others...in Baron's case, look to his posts on the NEJM Editorial I posted earlier...then my responses...he failed big time, but refuses to apologize...typical.
If you'd like to go into further detail, ask away...you just might then question his 'cred' as well.
(no message)
(no message)
I'm still not finding a false accusation, just disagreement.
article specifically identified the "Study" and provided a link to it, which shows their full report...plus the report provides a link to an even more detailed set of DATA in the "Supplemental Appendix"...that's all the data anyone would require from a world renowned medical journal.
Kind of odd that Baron, after 30 years of practice, never thought to seek out the referenced report that formed the basis of the Editorial article...at least it does to me?
Baron was WRONG...the Editorial DID CONTAIN A REPORT...and it had plenty of DATA.
btw, you're looking pretty silly right now...care to go on?
You said that Baron had made false accusations towards you. I asked you to name one. The best you've got is to retreat into his disagreement with the nature of something published in N.E.J.M.
That isn't a "false accusation" of you.
You're an embarrassment to yourself, if that's even possible.
(no message)
You said he levied a false accusation towards you, and that you were entitled to an apology. That's badly misleading, and you know it.
from BVZ's attached post...
--------------------
I Knew he’d post some falsity to thus. Misrepresenting an editorial as a study w/data and
… not only is it just an editorial opinion piece by two liberal nonmedical doctors, its an editorial of an opinion formed BEFORE the Cochrane study was known.
The thing is, he probably didnt understand what he was posting - he’s an uneducated Cliff Claven wanna be….with lots of relatives
to quote, I am sure.
Now back to ignore for him.
-------------------
Again...the NEJM Editorial I posted contained the Full Report, along with Detailed Data...he was/is wrong...why he didn't notice the report and data, I have no idea...charitably, he was just being lazy...that being said, he still hasn't apologized for accusing me of posting a "FALSEHOOD"...I think we've settled that claim already.
Baron's whole identity and self worth are wrapped up in his MD degree...with my very successful Infectious Disease and Pulmonary/Critical Care (ICU) family docs close at hand, I'm a threat to him since if there's ever a serious medical issue related to COVID, I've got the right answer...he's not dealing with it very well.
btw, I got a kick out of Baron admitting that he wasn't always 'Ignoring' me...I knew that, but it's nice to hear him come clean. BVZ is an odd duck...makes stuff up all the time...all day, every day.
Link: https://forum.uhnd.com/forum/index.php?action=display&forumid=2&msgid=120141
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
acknowledging the error you pointed out...just showing there are clear examples of proper and improper behavior...
...you know, we should talk more about your claims against me and see if they are justified...want to do that?
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
It's not a hard challenge to you...read the posts and then...using those documented facts...tell me your call.
(no message)
researched posts...all you have to do is copy and paste his statements if you think he was correct in what he said...you've hung in this long, shouldn't be all that hard for you...
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
Sorry it makes you feel inferior.
Keep your chin up. Talk to your friends for support.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
WaPo only has 2.5 million subscribers. The Times is better, at 10 million. Those numbers show that your assumption is wildly inaccurate. Of course, this isn't surprising given that you are consistently wildly inaccurate. It's just another data point.
(no message)
How racist are the NYT and WaPo for not providing those subscriptions to marginalized groups free of charge?
Essentially everybody but white male Republicans
Buying a subscription makes you superior to those who don't? That's a lot of people. A lot of your lib constituents.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
Remember that 1980's fiasco?
Link: https://sites.smith.edu/fys169-f19/2019/11/22/janet-cookes-jimmys-world-and-the-fear-of-lying-media/
(no message)
He's also a cheap bastard who won't help his fellow unsubscribed libs.