Aother edit.

Re: Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Circuit / A First Application on a Hot Water Cylinder
« Reply #84 on: July 27, 2010, 08:50:31 AM »

Guys, just to remind you all.  If you post - then as day follows night - you are also, inevitably, going to hear from Glen and/or Harvey through your PM systems.  The procedure here is to 'twitter' off forum with a barrage of unsubstantiated allegations that will either embarrass you away from the thread or away from support of the technology - or both.  And it will have less to do with facts than with a rumour mongering and witch hunting that is unprecedented against any one person and against any given technology.

Only two of the many people that they have contacted - alerted me to their system of discreditation.  But I am very aware of it's effectiveness.  It may mean that I will have to advise on this development exclusively through my Scribd file.  It's a covert system of attack that actually leaves me entirely defenseless.  I only ask that you ask for 'substantiation' if they allege anything at all.  Or better still - require that they come out of hiding and make their comments public - as is required by Open Source disciplines.

Just know that they are both working very hard to deny the experimental evidence they previously proved.  I think the reach - right now - is to claim that this is their discovery and deny my part in it - in any way they can manage.  Strangely paradoxical is that they have a dedicated thread designed and used to deny the very benefits that they first made public.  Glen has removed most of that data from public view.  I think it's now hidden in a small folder somewhere and he is now shamelessly claiming this as his own work.  If he actively advanced applications I'd be inclined to ignore it.  But he can't advance this precisely because he cannot wrap his mind around the thinking that requires this advantage.  Neither of them can.  If they could then I would have been very happy to leave this in their capable hands to progress.  But it's the urgent need to 'diminish' any contribution that I may have that worries me.  There must be some motive here.  And I find that such huge efforts expended on this objective to kill my association - rather undermines my own need to ensure that this technology remain open source.  They're trying to bury the technology and my reputation along with it.  Please bear this in mind when and as they reach you.  We really do need this technology.  And albeit small - these my contributions may be usable - especially as it relates to the thesis and the justification for results that exceed COP>1.

Regards,
Rosemary
http://www.scribd.com/doc/33937867/IF-I-WAS-A-TROLL

Guys, sorry about all those post repeats.  They needed editing.  Hopefully when Stefan gets back he can put them back in sequence.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

hi rose, on aug.18th i got the inevitable PM from glen you said would be coming sure as day follows night. i thought you would like to know. it was mostly just a link to his skydrive.

Hi Wilby.  He spends more time on this forum than his own thread at EF.com.  I feel sorry for the guy - in a way.  I think he's anxiously trying to draw attention to a second series of tests that they did on more sophisticated equipment - which test was designed to fail.  It's easy to fail a test.  You just need to keep adjusting the pot until the sum of the voltage over the shunt resistor moves into postiive.  It's that need to alert everyone to the failure that is so sad.  But you can't get that genii back in the bottle.  Ever.  LOL

Anyway - he's basically committed intellectual suicide by hiding his data as he does and claiming the work as his own.  That's the ultimate Open Source NO NO.  It's why he needs to do this at all, that's troubling.  I'm rather inclined to think that's he's just really badly advised.  But it seems that opportunism still rules.  Lots of it.  He's still trying to get me banned here.  Truth is I'm just too busy at the moment to give it all much attention.  I still need to follow up on the information to the FBI on that x rated link - that Chet posted.  That's on Fuzzy Tom Cat's adult site which, apparently has nothing to do with Glen.  To compound the coincidence is that the link features something disgusting about ainslie.  There you go.  Extraordinary evidence of randomness.  Beggars belief I'd have thought.  LOL.   It is my opinion, as I've said, that he's a scoundrel.  I'm just so sorry that I didn't realise this really early.  But one lives and learns.  I'm just a really slow learner.

Kindest regards,
Rosie
EDITED

@ GLEN


For some reason my PM's dont work on this site anymore, so i cannot reply to you that way, and i was unable to locate the thread you found me on, but since i KNOW you're reading this one, i'll respond to you here......

I really dont care about your "legal" battles, i have no intention of assisting you when it concerns a device freely discussed on an OPEN SOURCE FORUM.
I have absolutely no sympathy for you and your partners in this situation.
Yes, from all outside appearance, it seems to be great work you have done to advance this technology. And perhaps, in some esoteric fashion, you should be given "credit" for lending a helping hand. But i dont think that makes this tech. "yours".

And in either case, there should be no claims to proprietorship on anything that is posed here by its respective inventor.
The act of posting such information on this OPEN SOURCE FORUM comes with the explicit and implicit knowledge that the technology is to be deemed OPEN SOURCE. Period.

I will have nothing to do with what you are trying to accomplish.
  If it is my advice you seek, i would suggest that you post the information you have HERE, in its appropriate location.
and continue your efforts to further this technology.
What you ultimately decide to do is entirely up to you.

But i dont appreciate you attempting to persuade myself or other members of this forum to conspire against one another.
We are here to unify and share our knowledge. not keep secrets and divide us apart.

   Sm0ky.  Truly a STAR.  I'm always ridiculously emotional - but this post has actually left me feeling choked.  I keep hoping for this kind of response and HERE IT IS.  Open source is PRECISELY that - it's open and open to INSPECTION.  There is nothing that can ever be achieved by nefarious, cloak and dagger murmurings and whisperings.  Truth needs to stand up to the light of day.  And it's not promoted in shameful little dark corners.

I have no idea what it is that Glen has advised you all.  Nor do I want to know.  It'll involve me in more counterclaims and such is tedious - in the extreme.  But I know enough about the caliber of the members here to also know that they ALL want progress in clean green.  And KEEP IT OPEN.  Otherwise it stinks of conspiracy. 

Thank God for OU.com and Stefan.  I'm entirely satisfied that without this thread this technology would, today, be forgotten on the internet.  Then sadly - it's progress will never be seen here on these forums.  And the truth is that it's these forums that are the real catalyst to some profoundly changing paradigms.  And the attendant benefits need to be jealously guarded.  We're not there yet.  But it's around the corner.

And just as an update.  We've FINALLY located the appropriate IGBT and the appropriate MOSFETS.  Two switches intended for design.  The IGBT due for delivery early next week.  Hopefully that will put paid to any further delays. 

THANK YOU AGAIN SMOKY.  Thank you for being a true blue open source member.  And thank you for being brave enough to post as you have.  I'm well aware of the courage required.

   

Kindest regards,
Rosie

Glen has done nothing wrong and his data has been available  for the public on the uni site ever since day 1. What a thread this is. I have been a neutral observer in the situation, the beef between people was escalated and not provoked by Glen. Those who dont focus on the technology will be kicked on the Ef.com, simple as that. Unless you were there and saw it all there is no way for you to judge.

If Stefan does not do it here, then good luck reading useless posts. Harvey, Aaron and Glen have done more to get the technology this  far  then any one. So far i dont see any practicality of not working independent with an open source circuit with this scenario. Glen is merely trying to warn what happened to him that's all. It back to the technology for us, no more needed to be said.

Ash

Then why all of the pm's to everyone?

Bill

Glen has done nothing wrong and his data has been available  for the public on the uni site ever since day 1.

Where is the data that was posted on the Ainslie COP 17 thread?  Where is the data that was posted on the links here on OU.com?  Where is the data that was available on photobucket?  Where is the replacement data on EF.com Mostfet Heating circuit thread?  Why has that been removed?  Where is the reference to all that data taken from the TDS3054C Tektronix - which was kindly loaned in return for 'HIGH EXPOSURE' of the equipment?  Why has it been replaced with irrelevant or insufficient data references - varied daily as Glen's whims change?  Where Ashtweth?  If what you are telling us all is the simple truth - then where is all this information?  And WHY does Glen see fit to play 'peek a boo' with something as important as this?  I know why.  He's trying to disassociate those results from the ROSEMARY AINSLIE COP 17 CIRCUIT THREAD.  That's why.  And he's trying to pretend that this, his work, was the only way to progress this technology.  I need to disabuse you both of these delusions.  There is NO FURTHER WORK being done on that MOSFET HEATING CIRCUIT - and if there were then it makes no sense.  That entire thread is devoted to denying any benefit in the technology.

What a thread this is. I have been a neutral observer in the situation, the beef between people was escalated and not provoked by Glen.

Ashtweth - I think your emails to me are proof of an entire want of impartiality.  I take it on trust that you want to advance clean green and your history speaks to this.  But the simple fact is that you have endorsed that MOSFET HEATING CIRCUIT which was tailored and designed to avoid any reference to me.  And ON RECORD is Glen's statement that ANYONE CAN POST THERE BUT ME.  How do you justify the advancement of a technology without reference to its SOURCE?  Is that not the minimum requirement on these forums.  Or are you endorsing Glen and Harvey's claim that this technology is their discovery?

Those who dont focus on the technology will be kicked on the Ef.com, simple as that. Unless you were there and saw it all there is no way for you to judge.

I was focusing on the work of the thesis - a dedicated thread - work on magnets - a dedicated thread - work on the technology - a dedicated thread?  WHAT TECHNOLOGY WAS I NOT FOCUSING ON?  I even initiated a thread on Leedskalnin's work.  I then posted - IF YOU WERE FOLLOWING SO CLOSELY - the following comment. Here it is again

"IF ANYONE CLAIMS TO UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING ABOUT LEEDSKALNIN THEN ONE WOULD EXPECT THEM TO BE ABLE TO DUPLICATE THE MIRACLE OF CORAL CASTLE'  That was when my post was deleted and I was BANNED.

What is being addressed here is the FACT that Glen sees fit to message everyone as he did at EF.com with a slew of secret little murmurings against me.  Do you rather demand that I do NOTHING?  PROOF of these slanderous efforts are right here on this thread.  NOW tell me how much that is in the interests of Open Source, Over unity, clean green - name it?  It is entirely COUNTER PRODUCTIVE.

If Stefan does not do it here, then good luck reading useless posts. Harvey, Aaron and Glen have done more to get the technology this  far  then any one.

Really?  Exactly WHAT is it that they've done?  Even Omnibus has done more than either of them.  At least he tries to get the standards up to what is academically acceptable.  If the MOSFET HEATING CIRCUIT is a guide to their contribution then they've done nothing but try to deny the very benefits that they earlier proved and attested.  Don't give me this Ash.  Your not making sense.

So far i dont see any practicality of not working independent with an open source circuit with this scenario. Glen is merely trying to warn what happened to him that's all. It back to the technology for us, no more needed to be said.

  If the email you sent me is a sample of Glen's efforts to 'warn people' then I would urgently propose that he is only warning people AGAINST a viable provable clean green and it can only be considered self-serving.

When Glen freely and widely acknowledges that he did not - himself - fortuitiously and accidentally put that circuit together and that he did not - himself - motivate the Tektronix to measure that effect - and when he acknowledges the fact that there was a thesis that predicted this effect - then, indeed - one may see MUCH to justify his complaints.  But right now that IS the complaint.  It's a viable technology and it needs to be progressed.  And ALL rights to claiming a 'discovery' must be forfeit.  This is a technology that belongs to EVERYONE.  He has no prior art claims here.

Regards,
Rosemary

Ashtweth, kindly answer my questions.  I provoked Glen?  Exactly how?  Be specific. 

Regards,
Rosemary

if you can stay on topic then things will get better.

The day WILL come Ashtweth when you and Glen and Harvey and, for that matter Aaron, will be accountable for your anxious desire to get rid of my name as it is associated with this technology.  Just know this.  The eternal comfort of Open Source is precisely because it is OPEN. 

I am still waiting for the answers to my questions.  Where exactly did I PROVOKE Glen?  Was it because I contended his rights to all information related to the REPLICATION?  If so - that's shaky grounds for an excuse.  If he doesn't like me that's fine.  It's mutual.  But more important than his likes or dislikes is the NEED to progress this technology.  What he is doing is FRUSTRATE it.  And thereby he loses ALL credibility with me.

Regards,
Rosemary