From: wdo@TEFS1.acd.com (Bill Overpeck)
Subject: Re: Attention!
Organization: Applied Computing Devices, Inc., Terre Haute IN
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 16:47:31 GMT

In <1992Sep11.164220.3051@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com 
   (dean.kaflowitz) writes: >
In article <1992Sep11.152346.21670@acd4.acd.com> wdo@TEFS1.acd.com 
   (Bill Overpeck) writes: >>
In <1992Sep10.114521.21248@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com 
   (dean.kaflowitz) writes: >>>
In article <1992Sep9.231533.14559@csus.edu> chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu 
   (Stephen A Chaney) writes: >>>>

>>>> I proved my case and presented all the facts needed to prove it beyond
>>>> a reasonable doubt. 
>
>>> Perhaps in the dimly lit theater of your mind you did.
>>>
>>> This boy is one funny little feller.  Keeps declaring victory
>>> for himself no matter how stupid the posting he presents.
>>> 
>>> And Overpeck doesn't think this little feller needs a therapist?
> 
>> Hmm.  Well, to me, it doesn't sound substantively different than 
>> the following, which was written after I'd asked Keegan to defend 
>> his diagnostic impressions by providing a list of symptoms that
>> seem applicable to Holtsinger or Chaney (he didn't, though I 
>> suppose he could still be at the library).
>> 
>>    In <1992Sep10.020726.6021@crd.ge.com> keegan@pan.crd.ge.com 
>>      (James G Keegan Jr) writes: 
>> 
>>    "perhaps you're just doggedly hanging on to a point you've 
>>     already lost."
>> 
>> :-)

> Keegan had an argument with merit.  

Keegan has neither the information nor the background with which
to mount any argument related to the mental health of Holtsinger
or Chaney.

> And Keegan, bless his evil
> heart, doesn't think he's a cyborg or an airplane.  

If you could demonstrate that Chaney actually does/did, then
Keegan would look a bit more credible.

> If you
> read that entire article by Chahallney, you'll realize that
> his declarations of victory demonstrate a separation from
> reality.

Your powers of inference must exceed mine, Dean.  I don't 
see any indication of psychotic process.  All I see are 
anger and immaturity.  

> And you didn't answer the question, Bill.  You just provided
> an example of someone doing something that appears, on the
> surface, to be similar, but which isn't for the reasons I
> cited.

The answer is:  we don't know - we lack information - there 
is no indication of psychopathology in the information we
have, i.e. his posts.

> Come on now, Bill.  Taking his remarks about his home life,
> his overweaning fondness for his imagined inheritance, his
> postings in which he declares victory when his posting is
> ridiculous, his pretending to be an airplane, a cyborg, and
> I think there were a few other flights of fancy there that
> have slipped my mind, you really don't think he needs
> some serious counseling?  Maybe with a Freudian of the old
> school who'll keep him occupied for about eleven years, all
> the while nodding and saying "mmhmmm" and not much else?
> Why, he'd still only be twenty-three when he completed his
> eleven years of therapy, enough time to start a useful,
> productive life.
>
> Nah.  On second thought, don't answer the question.  That
> would be prejudicial.

Too late, already answered.

Bill