Skeptic Project

Who gives a shit Neil. You're a liar.

Matt, is that your answer for my revealing point that you would never speak to anyone like this in person by your own admission? That basically you use the internet as a place you can actually pretend to have a spine?

Apparently you all give a shit. Or we would not be on page 12 of this conversation. :)

Problem is Neil is a 35 year old man who likes comics, computer games and he thinks he is the mature one here, and lives in a trailer while pretending to be some other fantasy figure in his imagainary past times. If only he stopped being so lazy and got out he could maybe afford to live some of his fantasies, like say meet an actual female wrestler and take her home to a nice apartment for some casual sex.

I don't really care about that anymore. I proved that the posts could of been edited. Even Paul (Anti-cultist) admitted to that.

The people who's opinion of me actually matters know better. (Because they actually know me) And they looked at it logically. There really is no reason for me to do that. And that was enough for them.

Not going to go around in circles anymore. I am more interested right now in why Paul Jones feels the need to spend so much time researching someone who supposedly nobody cares about, and why Matt is afraid to admit that he is a troll on the internet because he is too cowardly to be so in real life.

Why am I not a troll in Realwordistan? Because most people in Realworldistan have things like jobs where they spend eight hours a day behaving themselves. Most people in Realworldistan don't deal with white trash dishonest weirdos who push conspiracy theories.

You just don't get it, do you Neil?

You will put yourself in the firing line though Neil, you have noone else to blame for the rest of us all laughing at you but yourself.

Paul, you just admitted your past time is hurting people on the internet for your own amusement. You put a lot of time into that. And the disclosure project I guess.

Apparently in your world I am the only 35 year old who likes comic books and video games? Statistics would say otherwise.

"Nevermind the fact some people would probably be inclined to kick your ass. I am not one of those people, mind you."

What you're saying is that you'd like to try and kick my ass, and believe me, I'd love to see you try.

You are abnormal. The reason I don't treat people the way I do you is because you are an abnormal piece of shit.

"Apparently in your world I am the only 35 year old who likes comic books and video games? Statistics would say otherwise."

No, that's the problem. There are lots of people like you!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E12mJT1WLvY

"What you're saying is that you'd like to try and kick my ass, and believe me, I'd love to see you try."

Matt, is that statement supposed to be impressive from the safety of your keyboard all the way on the other side of the United States?

"You are abnormal. The reason I don't treat people the way I do you is because you are an abnormal piece of shit."

Actually, taking joy in hurting other people or shaming them is abnormal. How many people who know you in person are aware of what you spend your time on?

"The only person who states theres anyone here hurting people is you, I just dont give a fuck about you son."

You don't find it erroneous to spend so much time on something you don't give a fuck about as opposed to spending that time on things you do care about?

And I am the one who is abnormal? :)

"I have no interest in impressing you. You're white trash. I'm only giving you the facts."

The facts? The fact is that you would never say anything like that to me if you ever met me. And would likely piss yourself if anyone you have victimized showed up at your door. Statistics tend to prove this:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/01/21/pearlman.online.civility/index.html</p>

Recently, in response to something I wrote on my blog about Jeff Bagwell and the Baseball Hall of Fame, Matt tweeted me a couple of times.
The words were snarky and snide and rude. His final message, however, left an extra special impression: "I got caught up in the anonymity of the internet. I'm sorry and here is a legit post with my criticisms." Upon opening the pasted link, I was greeted by a nasty pornographic image that would make Sasha Grey vomit into the nearest trash can.
When I later noted to Matt, via Twitter, that my 7-year-old daughter happened to be next to me when I clicked on the picture, he wrote: "lmao. You're so full of ----."
Normally, this sort of thing doesn't faze me. Write sports for a living (especially online, as I do for SI.com), insults come with the turf. You're dumb. You suck. You're an idiot. You're a moron. I'll never read your crap again. That's the %#$$ #$@@#$ %$$# thing I've ever heard. How do you have a job? Go to hell. Screw yourself. Drop dead.
I've heard them all, and aside from occasionally entertaining my wife with a reading from my Greatest Hits Packet ("I call it my 'Go back to Africa' folder," says Howard Bryant, an African-American ESPN.com senior writer), I turn the other cheek and move on.
But not this time.
This time, I aspired to know why Matt, cloaked in the anonymity provided by the internet, felt the need to respond in such a way to, of all things, a Jeff Bagwell post.
So, going deep, deep, deep undercover, I tracked him down and, shortly after our exchange, gave him a call.
Quite frankly, I wanted to hate him. I wanted to bash him. I wanted to plaster his name, address and personal information atop a column on CNN.com, so that when someone Googled his name for future employment, they'd find the words "Sent me a link to pornographic material."

Then we spoke. And I (dammit) liked him. Without invisibility or the support of his 54 Twitter followers or the superhuman powers supplied by a warm keyboard, Matt was meek and apologetic. "I was just trying to get a rise out of you," he said. "You're a known sports writer, and I thought it was cool. That's all. I never meant for it to reach this point."
Sadly, Matt's online behavior is far from an anomaly. Anyone who writes or is written about is now a potential target for abuse. Online civility -- it if ever existed -- has withered up and died. And it's only getting worse.
And online civility toward journalists? Well, 15 years ago, when I began my career at Sports Illustrated, everyone within the magazine's office would receive a thick packet of that week's letters to the editors. Some of the correspondence was positive, some negative. But few letters included words like "stupid," "dumb" or "asinine." Certainly no one, to my recollection, ever directed my attention to hard-core porn.
Now, with most online publications allowing readers to comment beneath stories, and with Twitter boasting an estimated 175 million users, and with a phony e-mail address a mere click away, readers can easily lash out. The filter that was a pen and paper has vanished, replaced by the immediate gratification of negativity. The concern for a writer's feelings? Ha. What feelings?

"It's about consequences, and not suffering from any," says Jacqueline Whitmore, an etiquette expert and founder of etiquetteexpert.com. "There are absolutely no repercussions to writing a nasty comment or e-mail, so people feel they can vent at will. They never think that the person receiving the message might be a real human being."

That's why, when journalists take the time to respond personally to venomous notes, proving that they are made of flesh and blood, the reaction is strikingly -- and puzzlingly -- positive.
"I don't know how many times I've tracked down someone who's sent a vile or nasty e-mail, tweet or Facebook post," says Richard Sandomir, the New York Times' sports media columnist. "It often results in their being so astonished, even honored, that you'd find them, that they act normally."

Bryant says, "I reply all the time by saying, 'Thank you for writing, I appreciate your opinion though I don't know why you needed to insult me.' The general response is 'Gee, I didn't think anyone was paying attention.' And they want to be pals with you. It's the kick-the-dog syndrome. People believe no one's listening; they think we're not people, they think there are these giant monoliths controlling thought. Then when they realize someone is listening, they rediscover their manners."

Indeed, along with contacting Matt, I also tracked down Andy, a 23-year-old aspiring writer who tweeted of me: "jeff Pearlman and billy madison share an intelligence quotient (because jeff Pearlman is a f---ing retard)."
When I dialed a number I found for Andy, his mother answered. (I admit, this brought me great delight.) Andy was even more apologetic than Matt -- and more willing to explain his actions.

"A lot of people out here are fed up with sports writing because we feel like all people in your business do is write things to rile us up," says Andy, a New Jersey native who blogs regularly about the Mets. "We feel like there's a lack of integrity."
Uh ... so you call me a f---ing retard?

"You know what's funny?" Andy says. "I enjoy your writing. But I disagreed with you [about Bagwell] and I got caught up in the moment. When you read something you think is bull----, you're gonna respond passionately. Was I appropriate? No. Am I proud? Not even a little. It's embarrassing. But the internet got the best of me."
Andy pauses. It's an awkward few seconds. He is not happy I called, and later pleads, "Please don't eviscerate me." But, to his credit, he takes responsibility, and says this is something he needs to work on.

"All I can say is, I'm sorry," he says. "I'm truly sorry."

@VTV I have already explained this three times. No one edited your blog posts. You tried to dismiss my point about why no one edited your blog posts. You tried to simply say that they were edited.

It's not an attack on you it's an attempt to help you see the point I am trying to make which is that it is obvious your "agenda" when it comes to editing blog posts is different then mine. Mine including a great deal more care for humanity as a whole.

You didn't show me anything. You made some numbers up. I don't have to provide evidence. It's pretty clear that no one edited your blog posts, and such things as VTV have a agenda that must me.

The proof of everything I claimed as far as no one editing your blog posts can be found in this thread in picture and cache files provided by Falkner Agentmatt. Please review this thread again and then Get back to me when you have. I am not going to type out all of that nor should I have to. Honestly I was hoping you were being rhetorical and it astounds me that you could actually not aware of this.

Tell you what. I am going to start feeding you poop. I will agree to pay a fee for it. (By the way, I don't think this is going to solve the problems your going to have when I get poop in your mouth.). Now which is more likely going to happen to you is it me feeding you poop or that your blog posts were not edited by anybody...

2012, again, what numbers are you talking about?

I proved they could be altered by Kush.

We cannot prove if he did, or he didn't.

We can prove I have no motive to do so.

And he obviously did.

At the end of the day, you can believe whatever you want. But saying "it's clear you did" is erroneous at best.

I don't really care about it other then that. As I said, the people who matter, who know me better then that don't believe I did. I clearly did not come here intent on convincing any of you trolls that I am a nice person who would never do that. It does not suit your agenda to believe that so you won't. That would be a waste of my time.

Right now I am just playing with a couple of people for my research. I am interested in their reactions. And I don't care other then that.