• Re: The notion of a "well founded justification tree" will be fullyelaborated

    From Chris M. Thomasson@chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com to sci.logic,comp.ai.philosophy,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy,alt.messianic on Sat Apr 11 14:08:44 2026
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 4/9/2026 11:01 PM, dart200 wrote:
    On 4/9/26 5:43 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
    On 04/09/2026 12:55 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
    On 4/9/2026 10:14 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
    On 04/09/2026 05:46 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
    In sci.math Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> On 4/7/2026 12:46 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
    In comp.theory Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote:

    [ .... ]

    Why are seemingly trying to justify pedo's?

    You're the sort of person who, 90 years ago in Europe, would be >>>>>>> asking
    "why are you trying to justify Jews?".

    Strange! pedo vs a person who is jewish?

    I just don't believe you're dumb enough not to see the analogy.  We're >>>>> talking about two groups of people who aren't popular in popular
    culture
    (of whatever time), and bullies like you think that justifies them in >>>>> harrassing members of those groups with degrading epithets.

    You used the term "low-life pedo" in this thread, implying that the
    target of your nastiness was less than human.  I suggest you
    reconsider
    all the implications, and then apologise publicly to Peter Olcott in >>>>> this thread.

    Besides everything else, individuals' sexual psychology is not on
    topic
    in the newsgroups this thread is posted to.


    "Otherism" as a usual account is sometimes demonizing specters and then >>>> threatening sympathy with association, and furthermore threatening the >>>> rejection of otherism as association with the demonized, besides the
    wider accounts of "otherism" and "we-think" and "in-group" types of
    pecking and the like, then furthermore is the association with "thought >>>> police" and the like, here vis-a-vis "thought crimes" and "real
    crimes".
    So, besides "un-popular", it's a gross bludgeon.

    Let us recall the stories we'd tell youth, or give youth to discover,
    the fable.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fable
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesop%27s_Fables#Select_fables

    Now, plenty of these fables have consequences,
    and some invoke a specter like "the boogey-man"
    as variously threatens irresponsibility or the unwary,
    or, punishes misbehavior, and even, when that
    invoking the specter, invokes the specter.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boy_Who_Cried_Wolf


    The psycho-sexual in the psycho-logical, is an aspect
    of thinking and feeling beings, largely biological.
    Anyways children should be more concerned with if anybody
    in their class likes them, not whether the world is full
    of monsters, after them. (Nor that they'll become one.)


    There is not a monster under the bed,
    there is not a monster in the closet,
    there is not a monster in the basement,
    there is not a monster in the yard.

    "The only thing to fear is fear itself."

    "So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we >>>> have to fear is fear itself — nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror >>>> which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance." -- FDR >>>>
    There is not a monster in your mind.



    Then, basically it's insulting to make "ad hominem" fallacy.


    I read a good book a few years ago about identity and including
    a chapter on otherism, and how easy it is to see through it,
    I'm thinking it was an "Ian B." or so, if I don't recall,
    something about "politics of identity" or "psychology of identity"
    or along these lines, in the philosophy section though as about
    psychology. If I recall it I'll note it here.


    Anyways, we still need a word for "loves children".

    Thanks for writing.



    A parent loves their children, indeed. Or at least they should? Olcott,
    might love them too much? Oh shit, there I go again.


    Try minding your own business and the old "innocent until proven
    guilty", and not be sham "operant-conditioning" that is still
    back on pigeons and dogs.


    If your actual interests are "protecting the children", and everybody
    else, from dangers real or imagined, how about investigating "ad-tech"
    for billions of counts and counting of "luring", "corruption of a
    minor", "child endangerment", and not even getting into slander and
    libel, "identity theft", "computer crimes", and so on. The "ad-tech"
    is not "social media", it's got no "safe harbor", and having
    algorithm'ed itself it's poisoned itself and pierced its own veil.


    Then, about what used to be "special services", these days with
    the "surveillance tech" making it more like "secret stasis",
    then that's also for busting surveillance tech. That and
    busting all the "seals" covering all kinds of "mistakes".


    Yes, let's protect the children by busting ad-tech and surveillance
    tech. For example, they're liable for anything they know.

    Sometimes: ignorance _is_ a defense.

    idk if u've used the rest of the internet in the last decade or so,

    but pedos are basically the ultimately boogieman that somehow sit below literal serial killers and mass murders on the social media hierarchy,

    usenet (which i only joined last year) is the only place i've ever seen
    any amount of nuance applied to subject, probably because censorship
    doesn't really exist here, and therefore the discussion cannot be shaped
    by the fear of people in charge

    imo this is likely a reflection of an incredibly amount of systemic
    sexual trauma we've received by how modern society represses sexuality during childhood, which i think is an appendage of how religion used to repress it, that somehow snuck it's way into secular society...

    my wife just gave birth to a boy 6 hours ago, and i'm unsure of how to protect him from that during his childhood 😕


    congratulations! Well, you can try to do all you can. But there are bad
    people out there. Those little bastards can sneak in and cause harm. I
    wish you and your family well.
    --- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Chris M. Thomasson@chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com to sci.logic,comp.ai.philosophy,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy,alt.messianic on Sat Apr 11 14:11:10 2026
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 4/10/2026 4:24 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 4/9/2026 11:01 PM, dart200 wrote:

    Why are seemingly trying to justify pedo's?

    my wife just gave birth to a boy 6 hours ago, and i'm unsure of how to
    protect him from that during his childhood 😕

    Don't ever let him onto the internet. It's addictive. Case in point.

    Scary. He has to be able to use the internet, but its the wild west
    filled with predators. Sigh.
    --- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Chris M. Thomasson@chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com to sci.logic,comp.ai.philosophy,comp.theory,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy,alt.messianic on Sat Apr 11 14:12:52 2026
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 4/11/2026 2:11 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
    On 4/10/2026 4:24 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 4/9/2026 11:01 PM, dart200 wrote:

    Why are seemingly trying to justify pedo's?
    ;
    my wife just gave birth to a boy 6 hours ago, and i'm unsure of how
    to > protect him from that during his childhood 😕
    ;
    Don't ever let him onto the internet. It's addictive. Case in point.

    Scary. He has to be able to use the internet, but its the wild west
    filled with predators. Sigh.

    Case in point: Olcott. Afaict, he never denied why he got arrested...
    Claimed to be god or some crazy shit like that.
    --- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From olcott@polcott333@gmail.com to comp.theory on Sat Apr 11 16:16:34 2026
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 4/11/2026 4:12 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
    On 4/11/2026 2:11 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
    On 4/10/2026 4:24 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 4/9/2026 11:01 PM, dart200 wrote:

    Why are seemingly trying to justify pedo's?
    ;
    my wife just gave birth to a boy 6 hours ago, and i'm unsure of how
    to > protect him from that during his childhood 😕
    ;
    Don't ever let him onto the internet. It's addictive. Case in point.

    Scary. He has to be able to use the internet, but its the wild west
    filled with predators. Sigh.

    Case in point: Olcott. Afaict, he never denied why he got arrested... Claimed to be god or some crazy shit like that.

    Case dismissed official record expunged for more than a decade.
    --
    Copyright 2026 Olcott

    My 28 year goal has been to make
    "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
    reliably computable for the entire body of knowledge.
    The complete structure of this system is now defined.

    This required establishing a new foundation
    --- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Richard Damon@Richard@Damon-Family.org to comp.theory on Sat Apr 11 23:09:27 2026
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 4/11/26 5:16 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 4/11/2026 4:12 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
    On 4/11/2026 2:11 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
    On 4/10/2026 4:24 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 4/9/2026 11:01 PM, dart200 wrote:

    Why are seemingly trying to justify pedo's?
    ;
    my wife just gave birth to a boy 6 hours ago, and i'm unsure of how >>>>> to > protect him from that during his childhood 😕
    ;
    Don't ever let him onto the internet. It's addictive. Case in point.

    Scary. He has to be able to use the internet, but its the wild west
    filled with predators. Sigh.

    Case in point: Olcott. Afaict, he never denied why he got arrested...
    Claimed to be god or some crazy shit like that.

    Case dismissed official record expunged for more than a decade.


    Which just means you persuaded someone that the case wasn't worth persuing.

    Case dismissed is NOT evidence of actual innocence. Maybe you should
    look at the actual meaning of the words.

    It is still a FACT that you have been reported (and haven't even tried
    to deny it) that you said it was ok to have the child porn "because you
    were God".

    That shows your level of mentality, and morality.
    --- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Alan Mackenzie@acm@muc.de to comp.theory on Sun Apr 12 12:12:52 2026
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    Richard Damon <Richard@damon-family.org> wrote:
    On 4/11/26 5:16 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 4/11/2026 4:12 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
    On 4/11/2026 2:11 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
    On 4/10/2026 4:24 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 4/9/2026 11:01 PM, dart200 wrote:
    Why are seemingly trying to justify pedo's?
    my wife just gave birth to a boy 6 hours ago, and i'm unsure of how >>>>> to > protect him from that during his childhood 😕
    Don't ever let him onto the internet. It's addictive. Case in point.
    Scary. He has to be able to use the internet, but its the wild west
    filled with predators. Sigh.
    Case in point: Olcott. Afaict, he never denied why he got arrested...
    Claimed to be god or some crazy shit like that.
    Case dismissed official record expunged for more than a decade.
    Which just means you persuaded someone that the case wasn't worth persuing.
    Or that there was never any case in the first place. We'll never know.
    Case dismissed is NOT evidence of actual innocence. Maybe you should
    look at the actual meaning of the words.
    We have a tradition in civilised societies of the assumption of innocence
    until guilt is proven.
    It is still a FACT that you have been reported (and haven't even tried
    to deny it) that you said it was ok to have the child porn "because you
    were God".
    It is anything but a fact (or FACT). It is a vague allegation from long
    ago.
    That shows your level of mentality, and morality.
    Your post shows something about yours. The topic is entirely off-topic
    for this newsgroup. That you choose to harrass another poster with vague allegations of a criminal past irrelevant to the group does not reflect
    well on you.
    Please cease this harrassment, everybody.
    --
    Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
    --- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Chris M. Thomasson@chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com to comp.theory on Sun Apr 12 12:56:59 2026
    From Newsgroup: comp.theory

    On 4/12/2026 5:12 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
    Richard Damon <Richard@damon-family.org> wrote:
    On 4/11/26 5:16 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 4/11/2026 4:12 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
    On 4/11/2026 2:11 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
    On 4/10/2026 4:24 PM, Dude wrote:
    On 4/9/2026 11:01 PM, dart200 wrote:

    Why are seemingly trying to justify pedo's?

    my wife just gave birth to a boy 6 hours ago, and i'm unsure of how >>>>>>> to > protect him from that during his childhood 😕

    Don't ever let him onto the internet. It's addictive. Case in point.

    Scary. He has to be able to use the internet, but its the wild west
    filled with predators. Sigh.

    Case in point: Olcott. Afaict, he never denied why he got arrested...
    Claimed to be god or some crazy shit like that.

    Case dismissed official record expunged for more than a decade.

    Which just means you persuaded someone that the case wasn't worth persuing.

    Or that there was never any case in the first place. We'll never know.

    Case dismissed is NOT evidence of actual innocence. Maybe you should
    look at the actual meaning of the words.

    We have a tradition in civilised societies of the assumption of innocence until guilt is proven.

    It is still a FACT that you have been reported (and haven't even tried
    to deny it) that you said it was ok to have the child porn "because you
    were God".

    It is anything but a fact (or FACT). It is a vague allegation from long
    ago.

    That shows your level of mentality, and morality.

    Your post shows something about yours. The topic is entirely off-topic
    for this newsgroup. That you choose to harrass another poster with vague allegations of a criminal past irrelevant to the group does not reflect
    well on you.

    Please cease this harrassment, everybody.


    Its a documented case that Olcott claimed to be God, perhaps for the
    same reason he claims to have solved the halting problem?
    --- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2