Haran

Does IIDB have an ignore list? Lemme see if I can find it.


btw, before you go, can you tell me why you feel the need to start so many different threads on the ossuary/Shanks issue rather than including them all in one? hmm....get it to the top...smells like agenda....hmm...

Sauron

Knock yourself out. The loss is yours, not mine.


Whenever there is a new development, it's appropriate to start a new thread. Nothing unusual there. Moreover, as any thread evolves over time, it tends to drift off course from the original topic. A new thread tends to bring everyone back to the original focus.

By the way: I started a new thread today, under circumstances that refute your desperate characterization of my motives. Why did I start the thread? Just as I indicated: because a new development occurred (BAR's publication of what it thinks is new evidence in their July/Aug 2003 issue):
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...threadid=57931

Their position, of course, is opposite of mine, as I'm sure even you realize. Yet I started a new thread using an article which hypothetically undercuts my position on the ossuary. If I were trying to "force" everyone to believe that the ossuary is a fake, then why would I start such a thread?

So bottom line: nothing sinister here about my tendency to start a new thread, when a new development occurs on this topic. But it was nice try at deflecting responsibility for your own actions and accusations against the IAA, Haran.

Got that evidence of political pressure being applied to the IAA report yet?
Nope?
Didn't think so.

*sigh*

Except that combining all threads into one big thread would *still* mean that the topic would "get to the top" as soon as I posted an update in that thread. Since threads are sorted with the newest posts first, ya know? So your pointless idea about one huge thread wouldn't change things.

But you knew that already - you only intended your comment to be a distraction, a way to avoid facing the point that you have slandered the IAA and are now backpedaling on providing evidence of political influence on their report.

As for agenda - that's funny, coming from the man who mass produces flimsy excuses for the pro-authenticity crowd to hide behind.

Haran

Not really. Thanks for the answer.

Bye.