ed. note: Derek's defense of the PhD fraud accusation is primarily based on extremely old posts done by others. I believe that each of the posts that Mr. Smart quotes were addressed fully online. Actually, a large number of the posts that Derek copies here are really totally irrelevent to Mr. Smart's situation, because, they are discussions about what is or is not listed in DAI and Derek has said that his dissertation is not listed anywhere. I find much of this presentation difficult to follow and I believe irrelevent especially when considering the more updated presentation of Mr. Smart's PhD Fraud. I believe that a consistent tool that Mr. Smart has seems to use when dealing with the fraud issue is both distraction and obfuscation. To me this presentation seems to be using both of his favored tools to maximum effect. -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dsmart@pobox.com (Derek Smart) Subject: Anthology Of A Flamewar - The Last Dance Date: 16 Jun 1998 00:00:00 GMT Message-ID: <6m69ok$5an@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Mime-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: dsmart@pobox.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Organization: 3000AD Newsgroups: alt.games.bc3000ad,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action Yes, I cross-posted it and without BC3K in the subject. Once it's read, all you have to do is filter it out by the subject and you won't see any responses to it. My apologies in advance. BC3K was released incomplete by it's publisher. That much is already established. Whatever the reason, it should never have happened. The 3000AD team have feverishly toiled on the product and against ALL odds, has firmly established it as a viable title. With accolades from gamers worldwide, press everywhere, the game, with it's own flaws and weaknesses, has been received quite well and CONTINUES to defy all logic and odds against it's success. Appearing on mags worldwide, with review upon review saying positive things about it, the hard work has paid off and the grande finale will be realized someday soon. Real soon. Well on the way to being discredited, the sequence of events below displays a pattern. If it's not one thing, it's the next. Several times, I have bowed out of flamewars only to allow myself to get dragged in - again - over something that I can't bite my lip over. The recent example being Huffman posting email exchanges between him, myself and my attorney, in attempt to mask, taint and confuse the issues and proclaim my lawsuit as a suppression of free speech. Further blatantly LYING that an agreement was in place and furthermore, that he was threatened with violence. - the game released incomplete. blame D. Smart - the game does not work out of the box - blame D. Smart - the game has no manual - blame D. Smart - the game has a manual. Too big - blame D. Smart - the flamewars continue. blame D. Smart - the gamers can't get a new cd-rom of the game. blame D. Smart - the game is too complex. blame D. Smart - the game is not fun for some. blame D. Smart - the groups are tainted with BC3K flames. blame D. Smart - the Ph.D debate continues. blame D. Smart I have full intentions of carrying out my threats of lawsuit against Bill Huffman unless he complies with my conditions. Anyone who thinks it's an idle threat, is welcome to this opinion. When I start something, I usually, against all odds, try to finish it. I gave him several options and he has refused. Until the case is filed and heard, those options still stand. In case this got lost in the Swahili or Hindu translation, let me make myself clear, again - When I started developing this game, I didn't have a Ph.D. I designed it out of love for the art and because it was the game that I wanted to play. I did not wake up one morning and went "...oh, 'ang on a minute, it would be cool to tag a Ph.D at the end of my name" Anyone who thinks that an ego like mine would permit such a thing or that someone as intelligent as myself would do such a dumb thing, needs to think about this carefully and put aside all animosity they feel toward me. - There is no marketing that says "...buy this game, it was developed by a Ph.D, so it oughta be good!" My sig is exactly what is on my business card. Derek Smart, Ph.D. I could give several examples of this notion, but it's all been done before by most of you who have defended me on this very notion. - I will NEVER EVER release to this newsgroup or ANY party who has no vested interest in this topic, the source of my Ph.D. EVER! I'm not out to prove anything and have NO desire to. Am I ashamed of my school? No, not in so many words but for those of you who know the skirmish over the suppression of my dissertation, you already know why I have reservations about this. It's been explained here and via email on numerous email exchanges. I'm going to leave it at that. Those of you who know me, know that (a) I possess a bona fide Ph.D and that, while not from a largely known school, is a Ph.D. nonetheless. I earned it and I deserve it (b) I'm really a cool guy. This whole flamewar thing is an expression of anger, disappointment and in general, a venting medium (c) I am a hard worker. My dedication to my friends, gamers and peers, is second to none (d) at what I do, I'm one of _the_ best and I can say this with my head held up high, even at the risk of sounding like an egotistical fool. This risk, I'm willing to take because ... I BELIEVE IN ME AND MAKE NO EXCUSES FOR WHO I AM. If my talents are measured by the botched release of my game, then so be it, I guess I should go work for MacDonalds. If my talents and that of my team are measured by our commitment to the game and gamers, how far we've brought this game, what has been achieved - for a game that was DOA - then, we're superstars, respected by many (the emails say so), admired by everyone and developers alike. At the end of the day, only the gamers, who make this industry what it is, can make this call. The recently exposed 'Potter Affair' is just one of many examples of how my motive and intent are distorted by these detractors in a feeble attempt to allienate me from my gamers and to further discredit me. Something, they're going to have to try harder to do. If a gamer asks a question, posts a concern, even slags the game, I have NO problem with this. What I have a problem with are PERSONAL attacks. If you think the game sucks, fine. Tell me why and like every other suggestion that makes BC3K what it is today, it will be listened to. Don't come here (T. Rex is a classic example) and BLATANTLY LIE about the game in an attempt to continue this farce. Don't come here and throw personal insults at me. I will NEVER, EVER turn the other cheek. I will however, send my insults via email, provided your email address is valid (a strange occurence). It is not my intention to taint this group with bullshit. in working HARD on the game to the extent of releasing it for free to the world, I have done what I believe to be a good contribution to the gaming community. No matter how anyone looks at it, who is going to forget BC3K and Derek Smart anytime soon? Think about that for a minute. With this archive of my own and as result of an upcoming announcment (one that will DEFINITELY shock most of you) I hereby, bow out of this farce. I know, I know. I have said this on THREE occasions and got dragged back in. This time, I don't have a choice. I will continue to post as I see fit. I will ignore flamebait. I will be as helpful as I have always been and if my sarcasm shows through, it's just me. I can't change who I am but I can adapt to who I'm not. We've all had fun but I think after 20 months, it's about time we all bowed out. Me, I'm taking my ball, and I'm going home. The playground, once again, is all yours. Believe what you want. Say what you will. Jab all you want. I'm doing this for me, for the good of my gamers everywhere and for the sake of my friends, my family and my fledgling company. As of today, I am officially out of the flamewar. Have fun! ======================================================================= My game, BATTLECRUISER 3000AD was released incomplete by my publisher on 11/96 costing me millions of dollars in development money, putting my rep on the line and generally causing me to all but lose my mind. Everything else that has transpired is history, but here is a breakdown of pertinent details 11/96 - 11/96 game released incomplete and without my permission by Take Two - 3000AD breaks away from Take Two - Gametek (UK) refuses to release the game - 3000AD finds out game was actually shipped, when a copy was purchased - AOL forum flooded with insults and abuse from purchasers. - On AOL, fthx establishes himself as the new 'jackass to be' and rises to fame - After a heated debate between Mark Seremet and D. Smart on AOL, the forum is closed and everyone kicked out - Units continue to be sold, despite attempts to get Take Two to cease - 3000AD continues development on the game, without funding. This development turned into a 'patching process' because the game was now out in public - Development continues amidst all the controversy 12/96 - Except for the worldwide skirmish and insults, nothing interesting happened - A patch was released. This happened to be a hybrid of last version 3000AD did before leaving Take Two in October. Take Two never shipped it. This patch also removed the Take Two, Chase dogfighting engine. - fthx proceeds to give new meaning to the term 'cyber stalking' a felony in it's infancy with a felon in the making. - Development continues amidst all the controversy 1/97 - 2/97 - Take Two promises to re-release BC3K once 3000AD is satisfied it's finished - Patches continue a website is established - The Usenet erupts into an all out war. This marked D. Smart's first time experience with the medium, now fondly called, ' a cesspool' - Degenerate detractors rise to fame with some choice threads popping up. The posting limits for BC3K & D. Smart threads, reaches never before seen levels of frenzy. Everyone was advised to go on Prozac, D. Smart included. - D. Smart's attacks on Take Two continue and reach an all time high - Several gamer owners holding a 'license to insult' jump on the bandwagon - D. Smart establishes the 'a customer is not always right, especially if he/she is abusive' motto. The flamewar takes a new turn with insults, threats, and general misbehavior being perpetrated by D. Smart and all included. - Every mag in the civilized world, pans BC3K (and rightfully so) - fthx proceeds to make things worse - Development continues amidst all the controversy 3/97 - 4/97 - Game released by Gametek (UK) in Europe with D. Smart's endorsement (v1.01C4) with the understanding that owners would get the final version free. - Better behaved (Jon Normington excluded) UK gamers join in the fray. - Mark Asher, Cmdr Krud, Ted Saint, Bishop and a few other notables, take the flamewar to an all time high - D. Smart's insults and use of abusive and questionable language, reaches an all time high (low, depending on how you look at it) - fthx - The whole affair errupts into a two sided flamefest. The 'supporters' and the 'detractors' - Gametek sells all it's units to unsuspecting Europeans and was not allowed to do any further manufacturing - 3000AD, threatens legal action against Take Two for monies owed and for the release fiasco. Take Two ignores the threats and remains silent. - The usenet flamewar continues to burn. D. Smart remains in the thick of it. - fthx firmly establishes himself as a jackass aided by other notables such as Huffman, Pat Lundrigan, N'ai Chi et al - Everyone starts screaming for a manual now that the game works - somewhat - A group of core die-hard BC3K gamers is established - Development continues amidst all the controversy 5/97 - 7/97 - Take Two informs 3000AD that it has no plans to re-release the title - 3000AD seeks legal counsel. It goes downhill from there - 3000AD creates a plan to re-release BC3K. Plan included several technology enhancements, pointless features disabled or removed etc - A press release is issued. 3000AD and Take Two go to all out war. It was one sided, 'cause Take Two never showed up. - An attempt is made to determine how many units of the game were sold worldwide - The Usenet continues to bustle with activity. BC3K and D. Smart thread continue to dominate and permeate all popular groups - D. Smart ignores all pleas from lurkers and bystanders, to ignore flames. He agrees to do so - Mark Asher starts making sense. Krud follows suit. It goes further downhill from there because this is never the norm - Acknowledgement of 3000AD's efforts to right a wrong, reach an all time high. The die hard supporters set up camp. The die hard gamers seek the moderated sanctuary of the website forum. New detractor recruits show up. Rebels without clue and not a pot to piss in. It was fun, they said. - Some detractors abandon ship and later show up on the D. Smart camp and even went on to be testers; further strengthening the belief that 'for some, it was about the game. efforts were being made to right what was wrong, so there was no point to the flame'. Very few 'get it'. D. Smart continues to participate in flames. Questions of his sanity are submitted. Classic multi-page rants become the norm. - fthx continues being a pest and is now well on his way to being the 'great BC3K archive keeper' - A host of online and print mags take a new perspective. The Adrenaline Vault, Game Over and a host of others 'review' the fiasco - The manual is delayed due to attempts at stabilizing the game, locking down the feature set. D. Smart is called a liar for promising and not delivering, despite the reasons. A partial version is released with the demo on CGW. - alt.games.bc3000ad is formed. Whoever did it, probably thought that all the flames would be restricted to that group. What were they thinking? - The flame war reaches an all time high. It stops being about the game which was now well on it's way to 'working' - D. Smart is accused of being Critical Bill by several. Huffman counters to the contrary with "They can't be. There is none of the omnipotent ego in Critical Bill's posts" - Critical Bill shows up in BC3K threads. It goes further downhill from there. - Huffman and fthx are well on their way to establishing their hatred for D. Smart. The flame war was well on it's way to being about D. Smart. - S. Fong establishes himself as the funniest Usenet poster - ever. - Ironman becomes the biggest thorn in the sides of the Detractors - without trying too hard. - It gets surprising. K-Man, a diehard detractor posts this on 6/2/97 >I've been reading some of these posts, and after looking over how fast >the subject matter changes from analyzing a situation to flat-out >flaming, I think Derek deserves a little respect. I've even reread my >own posts, and I admit I was caught up in all the hype and >participated in the flaming myself. I thought I could down my >preacher's robes and criticize Derek for his poor customer service >because he participated in the flames himself. I profoundly exclaimed >that no other game developer would flame their customers, how could he >do such a thing! Unheard of! But think about it. A game developer that >resorts to the level of his angry customers, bitching back at them for >their ignorance and name-calling. This same game developer has pressed >on to patch a game that he could have forgotten about- especially >since he's receiving no profit from the sale ( I think, correct me if >I'm wrong). Those actions define the concept of determination. And he >should be recognized for it. If I contradict myself from my earlier >posts, so be it. Life is a learning experience. Sometimes we all have >to act like asses in order to see what's really going on. > >Granted, I still have criticisms about the game. No need to voice them >again. But its come a long way since it was first released. At least >it doesn't crash anymore. I've gone a little farther in the game, and >I can see that there is quite a universe of possibilities out there. >Yes, it is difficult without a manual. But it is playable if you try. >Maybe if we all post questions about game difficulties, we will get >responses from BC3k vets, and lessen the stress out of not having a >manual. Just a suggestion. > >I do believe now, however, that those who remember the legacy of BC3K >will remember how Derek Smart pressed on in the face of criticism. And >how this newsgroup held onto the interest of a game that didn't do >very well when it was first released. Look at the history of the game >and these posts. Its fascinating. What I once may have thought to be >a bad business decision may be the one decision that saved interest in >this game: for Derek to respond to his public, whether positively or >negatively. Time will tell how this will all turn out. But one thing's >for sure- I'm still playing this game. I wonder if a good majority of >the flamers are as well. - The game now works - somewhat - newbie and lurker, Doug Hillman and a host of others start posting about the game. The bloodshed that ensues is too painful to explain. 'nuf said. - The first longest thread in the history of the flame, is established. "The Future Of The BC3K Game System" 6/4/97 [345 posts] - In the longest thread (above) Mark, Huffman and several others, attempt to get a Fongalese parser going. It gets so hilarious, both sides forget the flamewar charter "...FLAME ON!" If you want a good laugh, go to www.dejanews.com and check out the thread. - Folks start learning how to use their killfilters. Those who didn't have one, switched newsreaders. - Some supporters/detractors, establish notoriety - Silverlock, Jere Lawrence, Huffman, Ironman, K-Man, fthx, Bishop, Saint, Jon Normington, Cloudman, Scout, Mark Asher, Krud, Webboy, Stuart Pak, Pat Lundrigan etc - Doug Hillman makes another mistake - never 'eard from him again. > You guys know the only thing more pathetic than the little toady guy who >everyone makes fun of? > > The little toady guy who tries to make fun of himself in order to >deflect the flak he's getting. Just makes my skin crawl. Can't figure >out how these type of people can live with themselves. - A lurker (posting as Tim & Mary) surfaces - briefly >I've posted two or three messages, but keep reading. It's lots of fun >watching Derek turn some idiotic dweeb into mush when they make claims >he can refute. And then it's fun watching people get SO INTO attacking >Derek, though he's said time and time again that he just doesn't care >whether we play/buy his game, since he's not really getting anything >from it. It's fun, and maybe I'm a little sadistic... I dunno. :) - Gus Smedstad (Interplay employee), surfaces - briefly >OK, I'll admit I've been lurking. I must admit, for me personally, this >thread has hurt the game greatly. > >My guess is that Dr. Smart genuinely cares about the game, and that he's >trying to improve it. However, the tone of his posts has been terribly >negative and unprofessional. They give me the consistent impression >that he doesn't care about his customers. > >Perhaps he actually does care, but he doesn't know how awful his >responses appear to an outsider. It doesn't help that they're often >crude and childish. I'm not shy of obscenity, but it doesn't give the >impression of intelligence. Nor do personal sexual insults sound like >the products of an intelligent mind. > >I'm sure that Dr. Smart is quite intelligent, but the tone of his posts >often is not. > >Yes, it's bizzare that there are people who enjoy flaming Dr. Smart. >However, it's not surprising, since I've seen the phenomenon many times, >no matter how polite the victim. > >That Dr. Smart flames in response is unwise, but somewhat >understandable. > >It's very easy to get angry with rude posts. It's even easy to read >rudeness into a post that's just asking for help, particularly if you're >already angry from genuinely rude posts. > >The problem is that if you're nasty to everyone who is even a little >unpleasant and/or irritated, pretty soon everyone is very angry with >you. > >My personal experience is that it's always worth being polite, and >giving the poster the benefit of the doubt. I've had angry detractors >become polite, reasonable, and supportive because I've remained polite. > >That doesn't always work, of course. Some people will remain convinced >that you're an evil con-artist who is getting rich from ill-gotten >royalties, and that your work is a product of satan which everyone >should avoid. > >The only answer I've found in that case is to leave such responses >alone, once you know the other person isn't rational. Anything you say >will be used negatively, and your energy is better spent on people who >want help and are willing to listen. > >There's some personal satisfaction in soundly roasting an annoying >detractor, of course. In my experience, though, the costs always >outweigh the fleeting satisfaction. Even if your response is witty and >reasonable. > >My advice? > >BC3K customers: drop the personal attacks and the anger and concentrate >on clarifying the problems. You want results, right? So Dr. Smart is >sensitive. What's more important, telling him how pissed you are or >getting the game you want? > >Dr. Smart: Grin and bear it. It's damned hard, but I'm sure you can do >it. At the very least, if you're going to flame, take the moral high >ground. Being crude and abusive hurts you a lot more than it hurts >them. > >Gratuitous flamers: Have fun, I guess. You're not looking for advice >from me, are you? - D. Smart goes to E3 in Atlanta (still trying to figure out why). Everyone misses him. He comes back with a new attitude (short lived of course) as observed by Mark Asher >Ok, Derek's been remarkably even-tempered ever since he got back from E3. >Is this just a coincidence? Did Derek "I don't give a fuck if you buy my >game!" Smart suddenly realize what many of us have told him all along, >namely that if he calms down most of the flames will die down? Nah, no >coincidence, and Derek didn't suddenly realize this. > >Or is it more likely that someone told Derek that he had to clean up his >act and behave in a professional manner if he ever even hoped to release >BC3030 with another publisher? My guess is that someone, perhaps even Take >2, took him aside and spanked him a bit. > >C'mon Derek, give it up -- tell us who told you heel and be obiedient. We >know you were dogging publishers throughout E3. Who threw you a milkbone? >Was it really Take 2? What did they tell you? Do you really want to amend >your behavior due to a hint of a promise? That's not like you. Let's see >some good rants! Tell us again how the president of Take 2 writes contracts >on toilet paper. Tell us how you hope to sue them. > >Mark Asher - Huffman is well on his way to being a liar to achieve his ends, as demonstrated in this exchange with Ironman. I only showed up on the Usenet in late 1996 after the game was released. >IronMan wrote: >> >>Man you really are clueless. >> >>Did you ever think maybe he's finished *using* you, you sap? He >>got what he wanted, blazzingly bright white hot attention getting >>publicity, and now doesn't need you and your buddies services any >>longer. You'll be lucky now to get him to reply to anything you >>say any more, much less be able to lure him in with your trollish >>traps. Your usefulness is at and end and you are now, >>expendable. Derek took his ball and went home, leaving his >>opponents twisting in the wind, and looking silly. But not to >>worry. I'll play with you. I'll go first. >> >So, seeing the great success from all the publicity that Tylenol >received 15 years a go when the Tylenol poisonings were occuring, >Derek got this brilliant idea to act like a pompous ass and destroy >his reputation in order to enhance the future marketability of >BC3030? A much simplier explanation is that Derek really is >a pompous ass. The proof is the fact that he's been a joke in this >news group for a few years now, starting before BC3K was even >released. > >Huffman > >The BC3K fiasco is bad, but I wouldn't go so far as to compare it >to the Tylenol poisonings! > >On the contrary, I'll bet he's lining up a publisher for BC3030AD >as we speak. The damage he received from his postings was minimal >at worst, and at best, a testement to his tenacity. Everyone who >read his harsh posts also read the insulting troll ridden posts >he was replying to. Replying to, not because he's a madman, but >because he feels passionatley about his game, and felt that here >was the place to make a stand, draw the line, and fight to the >bitter end, no matter what. It's what kept him going through the >dark days. > >But you know, I think Derek can see the light at the end of the >tunnel now. That's why he's not here. He's probably back on track >again, refreshed, cleansed of all the hate and recriminations, >ready to do it right this time. For us, and for himself. > >Thank you, and good night. :P > >-- The Invincible -- IRONMAN ! > >I guess you missed it Derek so here's some more proof that you were a >joke long before BC3K was ever released. It is also proof that your >transparent untruths you spew here in this ng were well known and laughed >about before BC3K was ever released. This is really funny, well worth >the read. ..........turn the clock back to 6/27/96....... > >Subject: Re: many games coming out in august >From: gschmidt@nyc.pipeline.com(Greg Schmidt) >Date: 1996/06/27 >Message-Id: <4qul3r$h45@news1.t1.usa.pipeline.com> >Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic >[More Headers] > >ya know, I was just going to post my own general complaint about (the >lateness of) upcoming strategy games. I hope you don't mind if I tack on >here ;). > >MOO2 - Christmas (I want this game so much I re-installed MoO this past >…snip… BC3000 - well, what is there to say? After its released (!?!?) >and reviewed (@$*#@*#))@) Derek Smart will defend himself by saying that >Take 2 Interactive forced him to release it "prematurely". >Ahhhahahhahahaha. > > >Walking into Software Etc. every other day to gaze at the shelves, > >Greg [NOTE: In the above post, little did Greg know how close to the truth he was] - fthx continues being a pest and goes into depression as noted in this premature RIP he did for Krud on 7/2/97 >Shortly after I posted the "Dr. Smart Classics From AOL", >the Take2 area on AOL was yanked. Since Take2 >announced long ago that they wouldn't provide support >there anymore, and there was an incredible amount of >embarrassing material on the boards (though some key >time periods were missing), it was just a matter of >time before they at least purged the messages. > >Now it appears that Cmdr Krud and the legions of other >BC3K "fans" have passed into oral history. > >fthx - fthx's archiving increases now that he only has one forum to concentrate on. He gets bad beating (he still doesn't notice) as seen here > > >Whee. You can use your capture buffer; your folks must be proud. > >In the words of Johnny Fever, "I think you're boring". > >Joel - The great debate between D. Smart and PC Gamer's writers ensues. Posts such as this were frequent. >Derek, > Seems as if PC Gamer just won't leave BattleCruiser 3000AD alone. > > In the August issue it's on page 118, in the review for the game >"Sentient", which they give a 58%. They refer to ambitous projects >that cross their desks containing a great concept, but which turn out >to be so damn screwy that they're unplayable. They place "Sentient" >in the group with BC3000ad of games that would provide gameplay as >deep as the ocean if any of them could figure out what the hell was >going on. > > (Last month someone made a comment about PC Gamer's derogatory >comments regarding BC3000ad in that issue, and you asked for details. >That's why I'm typing this, for your information). > > It's enough to make me wonder why they include a demo of Sentient on >that months CD? The readme indicates that a medium install will take >up 160 megs of hard disk space... I think I'll pass... > > Sincerely, > Ryan >Rip City - Dan Bennett of PC Gamer says that the mag will never carry the BC3K demo (though everyone else did) because they only carried demos of 'games that their readers requested'. After cataloging a history of demos based on dud games, numerous pinball demos, that comment spawned a 175 post thread. That was the last BC3K thread he posted to. When the dust settled, it seemed as if D. Smart was firmly established as 'PC Gamer enemy #1' (contradicted by later private emails from Gary and Tom). - Development continues amidst all the controversy ======================= 8/97 - Present Day===================== [NOTE: Too much stuff happened during this period, so, here's an even shorter accounting] - A 194 page manual, coupled with appendix data totalling another 100 or so pages, is released. Everyone is speechless. D. Smart, had, yet again, proven that he CAN deliver. The manual is acclaimed by the press and gamers everyone as one of the most detailed and excellent game manual ever written. The Detractors are suspiciously silent. The better half go ahead and acknowledge the act and attest to D. Smart's statements "...you can't do a manual for game that is work in progress and subject to change. Especially not one as complex as BC3K" - In February 1998., in unprecedented move, D. Smart, with a highly controversial press release, makes the definitive version of the game, v1.01D7C available for FREE to gamers worldwide. It it then carried by magazines worldwide. A new breed of gamer is born. The website reaches an all time registration high. - In a surprise move (development was silent about this one) a 3DFX patch for BC3K was released even when most large companies were releasing games without it. This patch was also released for free to owners of the FREE version. The world continues to gawk at the amazing screen shots from the game. - BATTLECRUISER:3020AD is officially announced. With over 45 new features, the ability for gamers to build in space and on planet surfaces, coupled with advanced multiplayer, the title is positioned to rock the genre upon release. Building upon an already established engine and with the lessons learned from BC3K, the team entrenches itself. - The Usenet flame war reaches an alltime high. Skirmishes between lurkers detractors and supports becomes common place. Aliases start to show up in an attempt to mindfuck everyone involved. - Someone drags Cleve into the BC3K flamewar who then plants himself firmly in the D. Smart camp. Everyone regrets it because now, flaming took on a whole new meaning with sensible and sometimes confusing attacks flying back and forth. Detractors started disappearing one by one. (Cleve has this effect)...only to emerge under the guise of aliases. Steadfast ones (Krud, Mark, fthx (uses several aliases still), Huffman etc) remain and weather the storm, hoping it would pass. It lasts 265 posts. Everyone stopped talking about games. Everything was game. - The 'casualties of Cleve' spawns a new sap called Baz. - Flamewar insults take a whole new turn. This time, everything went. Racist remarks, threats of violence, family values, intellect, finances, personal property..nothing, nothing, about games. Cleve causes several folks to spend time in the library. Duhs! were frequent from the lesser intelligent (dubbed - Degenerate Detractors) detractors who were only then realizing that they were _way_ out of this league. - D.Smart, yours truly himself, continues to surprise, anger, alienate, disorient, disturb. Developers didn't get it. Some gamers didn't understand it, Detractors loved it. Supporters...well, they didn't get it either. D. Smart? He never got it. "The customer is _not_ always right when he's being insulting' continues to be the last line of defense. - Someone posts something about D. Smart being to dumb to be a Ph.D and certainly not acting like one. The 'Great Ph.D. Debate' errupts. - D. Smart issues a bet to Huffman. - Huffman returns from vacation and posts this from the "Derek Smart = Habitual Liar" thread >… snip … > >>Now, if you were to wager your 12 months salary (which shouldn't be much), and >>we can get someone we trust to cash the checks, I can easily take you up on the >>qualification theory. In fact, better yet, we'll do 6 months salary for EVERY >>degree I have (all 3 of them). I will need you to send the mediator your last >>pay stub to verify your income. I get to chose who and I suspect that it will >>be a member of the press I trust or my attorney. Now, YOU show ME up, please. > >>Even if you lose the bet, I know you have bills to pay, so I am willing to take >>a garnishment for 50% of your salary until the lost bet is paid up. My web site >>recently signed up to accept credit cards (the link will be up shortly) since I >>will be selling Battlecruiser Commander directly as well, therefore, I can also >>take a credit card. In my case, I will submit a certified check for my end of >>the bet. > >Derek, here was my reaction. As visions of huge amounts of cash in my >bank account were dancing through my mind, I become concerned about >giving a possible sociopath my family's address (someone with fantasies >about breaking ribs and urinating in mouths is a possible sociopath). >The vast amounts of cash quickly overcame this concern (after all you're >on the other side of the country). However, after further reflection the >possibility of actually collecting a dime from an illegal agreement >(gambling is not legal in either of our states) from a habitual liar who >could not keep a legal binding agreement with three different software >publishers would be close to impossible. > >My conclusion is that this is really nothing more than a desparate >attempt on your part to deflect the real issue. The real issue is that >Derek Smart is a habitual liar. The crowning proof of this is that Derek >Smart does not even have a PhD. Derek Smart has claimed a PhD in every >post he has ever made. Therefore, Derek Smart is a habitual liar. > >Evidence? Many lies have already been documented. For example, Derek's >statement months a go that the manual was complete. The crowning evidence >of the habitual part of "habitual liar" is of course the PhD issue. >Derek has been unusually silent over the past year whenever anyone has >asked details about his PhD. I have never seen anyone else being >reluctant to discuss what university or college they went too, especially >when it was an advanced degree. > >>I await your decision. Perhaps you can get the other detractors here to help >>you with the bet. Ask Mark Asher, fthx and his girlfriend, Jon Normington as >>well. I can't think of the others because they all seem to have faded into >>obscurity lately. > >Tell you what Derek. I will promise to never again post an article to a >Derek Smart or a Battle Cruiser thread again if your PhD is confirmed. >My last Derek Smart post would be a public apology for calling you a >habitual liar. I will then join the silent majority who just read and >laugh. On the other hand, if your PhD proves to be bogus, meaning >nonexistent or a bullshit degree (e.g., PhD in Theology from the Miami >Beach Bible College) then, you may only post announcements or answer >questions on game play. No cuss words or unpleasant posts or flames will >be posted by Derek Smart, only professional responses. It would be in >your best interest to behave like that anyway. Therefore, I'm adding an >additional stipulation, you shall change your sig to say Derek Smart, >Ph.D. NOT! > >I await your decision. > >>I am sending you a copy of this via e-mail so you get it faster than your news >>server. > >Further evidence that Derek is a habitual liar. This was not in my mail >box when I got back from vacation. > >Note: I've made the correction to the first line of Derek's sig. > >>Derek Smart, Ph.D. NOT! >> D.Smart counters with >On Mon, 25 Aug 1997 19:11:43 -0600, bill.huffman@sandiegoca.ncr.com wrote: > > > >>Derek, here was my reaction. As visions of huge amounts of cash in my >>bank account were dancing through my mind, I become concerned about >>giving a possible sociopath my family's address (someone with fantasies >>about breaking ribs and urinating in mouths is a possible sociopath). >>The vast amounts of cash quickly overcame this concern (after all you're >>on the other side of the country). However, after further reflection the >>possibility of actually collecting a dime from an illegal agreement >>(gambling is not legal in either of our states) from a habitual liar who >>could not keep a legal binding agreement with three different software >>publishers would be close to impossible. > >Nice dodge. No can do. That was such a _lame_ attempt it's embarassing. > > > >>Evidence? Many lies have already been documented. For example, Derek's >>statement months a go that the manual was complete. The crowning evidence >>of the habitual part of "habitual liar" is of course the PhD issue. >>Derek has been unusually silent over the past year whenever anyone has >>asked details about his PhD. I have never seen anyone else being >>reluctant to discuss what university or college they went too, especially >>when it was an advanced degree. > >You have _got_ to be kidding! Are you _reading_ this. Let me see if I remember >correctly. In those posts (which I have and I'm sure that other nitwit fthx >has) several people indicated that my college qualifications had nothing to do >with anything. Of course, I didn't agree then because there _is_ a post in >which I mentioned my qualifications AND schools. Once it stopped being about >the game and you and those other shitheads made it personal, it became quite >clear that it was nothing more than a blatant and unworthy attempt at attacking >me some more. Not to mention the fact that ANY neutral person who comes to this >newsgoup and says anything good about BC3K stands a chance of being persecuted >by you assholes. A separate newsgroup was created but that didn't stop it from >happening. This is why the www.bc3000ad.com web site is restricted access only. >It's a safe haven. If you _think_ that I'm going to tell you fucking idiots >anything about my my life, school and family so that others who come here and >who read this shit, can be persecuted, you've go to be fucking kidding me. > >There are a lot of personal things I don't talk about it because this was >supposed to be about the game and my personal life has no bearing. If you must >know, for instance, my fiancee is a professional model that would make any >woman you've ever dated look like a witch. Those who know, seen and met her, >know this. In fact, the testers pestered me so much that one of them scanned an >image of us and posted it on the tester's FTP site along with an E3 picture. I >own a Mercedes 500SL convertible and a BMW 325i convertible both with 3000AD >plates. It's easy to check this. Check the motor vehicle records for Miami. If >you want the plate numbers, I'll provide them via email. I'm not afraid of you >coming to my house and beating me up. My father was an American career military >officer who died several years ago. My British mother owns a business and still >lives in England. Anyone can prove anything as long as it's true. If you think >I would do anything (like Mark Asher) to put my family and friends in the >firing line as a result of my stupidity (in posting and flaming here) and >actions, you're drunk. If you think that I would tell you what school I went to >so that that others can be persecuted and the schools associated with my >actions, you're right fucking nuts. I would under normal circumstances but as >long as I know who and what I am, what makes you think I give a shit about you >and yours? I may not have gone to Harvard, MIT or the like but the schools I >went to full/part time, taught me what I needed to know. Sure the advanced >mathematics came in handy, the Computer Science degrees were a farce because I >learned more _after_ the fact and to me, it was all a waste of time and money, >both of which I had at the time. > >So please, don't insult my intelligence. I would love for you to pay _somehow_ >for your stupidity, hence the bet. > >Now, I'll go the summary route that you took in associating the tardiness of a >game to my academic qualifications. Again, it just shows that I'm just as >stupid as you are for even bothering. For me, silence means consent and I'm not >going to stand by and watch you write shit you cannot back and/or verify. > >1. I hyped a game for several years. The press helped because then it was > an innovative idea. To date, there has been _nothing_ like it. > >2. The game was released incomplete so whatever it was hyped to do could not > be proven. Whose fault it is depends on who you're talking to. > >3. Regardless of the costs, I had NO choice but to finish it for the sake of > those who bought it and in the interest of making sure that the game lived > up to the hype and it's features. The game does EVERYTHING I said it > could do and MORE. It's an uphill climb to convince any detractor of this > but since I'm the one getting the email from users, I guess I'm the one who > needs to know. The sales figures don't lie. > >4. Though the game IS in development, I have strived to make it an enjoyable > experience for those who bought it. Those who bought it and it's their kind > of game, acknowledge this. The game is _still_ sellling and I have received > mail from guys working in retail chains explaining how people hound them > for a game that they pulled from their shelves in January. Again, I can send > > you the email. No problem there. > > If I am a liar for saying a patch would be released and then it was delayed > thru my fears of the repercussions considering the Oct. release fiasco or > because it was late, then by all means, call me a liar. I stand by my > decisions. > >5. A manual was not released by the publisher. I had no control over that nor > the release of the game. A manual could NOT be done because the game > was in development. A manual CANNOT be done because the game is STILL > in development. I decided to release some sort of manual which is accurate > to the game's current stage at the time. I canned the idea because it meant > double or perhaps tripple the work I had to do in the end. Those who > already knew how to play the game, did NOT need the manual. Like any company > wanting to release a game on a certain date and pushing it back, it was the > right thing to do. So I did it. Once I realized that the game was at a stage > > (D patch) where it would not mean much work to update a manual, I released > the preview. That manual had ALWAYS been in development and updated > as development continued. This is why the version released in October by > Take2, the manuscript that leaked out in November from Take 2, the version > shipped by Gametek in March, the version I released for the demo in April > and the preview I released in August are ALL different! To date, _only_ the > versions I have released are even a representation of the game. Why are you > not hounding companies who do shoddy manuals only to release a hint guide? > > If I am a liar for saying the manual would be out and then it wasn't, then by > > all means, call me a liar. I can live with that because in the end, it's > about taking charge, making decisions and STICKING to them at all costs. > >6.If I am making advancements in the technology in lieu of a re-release which > in itself extends the patch release dates, then you don't understand what it > is I'm trying to achieve. Unless you are faced with these decisions and > sitting where I'm sitting, you will _never_ know. If you think that I would > spend a year just patching a game that has already reached it's life > expectancy for the sole purpose of sighing a breath of relief then, again, > you don't know what you're talking about. Did I need to use hi-res satellite > maps? Did the 18 renderers need to be updated for speed, accuracy, > visual effects (dynamic lighting, lens flare, transparent cloud effects > etc)? The answer depends on what the plan is. I had full intentions of > re-releasing this title, with or without Take 2. Finishing this game and > putting in these advanced features in a PATCH is MY token of appreciation > to the owners who stuck with this game. My way of saying thanks for waiting, > the game you now have has grown from what it was in October. I am catering > to the gamer because in the end, he/she will remember. If the game was > released complete, NONE of these features would be in it. But of course they > would form the basis of the sequel wouldn't they? That sequel is in the > works and yes, the renderer goes further with 3Dfx, Rendition and MMX > support as well as new poweful features. There are two sci-fi games coming > out at Christmas, 10th Planet and Star Fleet Academy. I'm not losing any > sleep. Even the next iteration of Wing Commander is the least of my worries. > That's what being competitive is about. How many gamers who own WCIV > & Privateer2 are still playing them??? Yet still, idiots who don't know > what my plan is, keep harping on me not getting the first game done but yet > > I'm talking sequel. As far as I'm concerned, when Take 2 and Gametek sold > the game, they acknowledged that it was done. I didn't. I could've, but I > didn't; yet you call me a liar. > >If I am a liar for not putting my personal life in the forefront of your stupid >vendetta which has NOTHING to do with a game. Then please, call me a liar. >It's guys like you who later become politicians and steer away from the real >issues and instead attack your opponent because he was banging some hooker and >smoking pot in high school. > >I care not for your stupid rants and everytime a new thread pops up, it's kinda >cool because it provides yet another soapbox. Thanks for the exposure but >you're not doing yourself any favors because you're just as stupid as the shit >you write if you think any of this bothers me. > > > >>Tell you what Derek. I will promise to never again post an article to a >>Derek Smart or a Battle Cruiser thread again if your PhD is confirmed. >>My last Derek Smart post would be a public apology for calling you a >>habitual liar. I will then join the silent majority who just read and >>laugh. On the other hand, if your PhD proves to be bogus, meaning >>nonexistent or a bullshit degree (e.g., PhD in Theology from the Miami >>Beach Bible College) then, you may only post announcements or answer >>questions on game play. No cuss words or unpleasant posts or flames will >>be posted by Derek Smart, only professional responses. It would be in >>your best interest to behave like that anyway. Therefore, I'm adding an >>additional stipulation, you shall change your sig to say Derek Smart, >>Ph.D. NOT! > >The answer is no. I hope it eats you up inside and rips your heart out. And no, >I didn't even go to school in Miami (I just got here) and no, it's not in >Theology, it's in Computer Science from some polytechnic I paid to give me one. >Please. > >>>I am sending you a copy of this via e-mail so you get it faster than your news >>>server. >> >>Further evidence that Derek is a habitual liar. This was not in my mail >>box when I got back from vacation. > >Blame your isp. Agent is configured to send email. As far as I know, it does. >In fact, I just checked, you have changed your email address. > >>Note: I've made the correction to the first line of Derek's sig. > >All you've done is danced around the real issue. You were on vacation huh? >Yeah right. Isn't it kinda coincidental? Then you come back, after your fantasy >vacation, to create a new thread. I can safely say one tiny thing, there are >people here who know me, laughing their heads off at your bogus attempt. > >And that business about not posting and all that crap, what are you? Psychotic? >You must be if you think for _one_ minute that all that crap you and your >minions post, bothers me in the least. It's fun to wake up in the morning and >respond to this bullshit over a warm cup of coffee. Brightens up my day. >There's nothing like a nice warm conflict to put the adrenaline in your veins. > >The resources of the Internet are more than adequate to help you find what >you're looking for. I studied in England and the US. I have three degrees in >Mathematics and Computer Science. The MSc and Ph.D were done part time. >Now, go to the work. I thought you would be doing this by now but instead, you >come back with some lame excuse about being on vacation and all that jazz. > >I'll be here, waiting. I've given you more shit to be jealous off and pissed >off about. Deal with it because contrary to what you and your minions think, I >have a damn good life because I created it, I maintain it and I surround myself >with people who are proud of me and worthy of my friendship. Assholes like you, >like those you meet on the street who scratch your car, barge into you etc, >have no place in my life. You and I will only converse via this wonderful >medium. You're probably the kind of guy who has asshole written all over his >face. Me, take a look at all my photos in trade publications, magazines etc. >Just some intelligent, smart, debonair looking black (I'm mixed actually) guy >with a purpose, in corporate America. Who did you say you were again? > >Deal with it dude, where I've been, you only have wet dreams about. I may be >shooting myself in the leg with all this bullshit but since I will ALWAYS call >the shots, I will ALWAYS be able to write my own ticket. I'm a leader, not a >follower. If I go looking for a job, it's my talent I'm selling. If my employer >thinks I'm a pr nightmare because of this BC3K fiasco, then he can always hire >someone else. Since I won't be out looking for a job anytime soon, I don't >have to worry about any of this crap. As long as what's in my head stays >there, I will ALWAYS be able to do what I want, when I want and how I want. > >Have a nice day. - Sixball/Bp establishes himself as the Usenet idiot. fthx is reduced to 'pest' status. D. Smart is reduced to 'nutcase'. 'nuf said. - Huffman takes off in search of a thesis by D. Smart. Doesn't find it and proceeds with a long process fraught with fabrication, lies and everything else you can think of. All in attempt to discredit D. Smart. - Several people, including Brian Bax, Dan Brooks, J. Martiney, proceed to correct Huffman who by this time, had established a website (following suit with fthx) to catalogue his findings. During the process and he learned how the suppressing and accreditation system worked, he continues to alter, change and massage his web page. >On Mon, 13 Oct 1997 11:54:19 GMT, sixball@worldnet.att.net (B P) >wrote: > >(JMarti wrote:) >>>1. Mr. Smart was, at some point, enrolled in a PhD program. > >>I suspect that, that is also unlikely. > >Why? Unlike MD, MBA or JD programs (which are very hard to ENTER but >have completion rates of 95% of total enrollment), PhD programs are >easier to enter, but hard to finish. More than half of all PhD >students never go "all the way". > >>>2a. Mr. Smart did not finish his degree because he wanted his work to >>>remain his intellectual property. He should then have a MS degree (if >>>he completed the coursework and passed the quals). He may, or may not >>>have a complete dissertation. >>completed not. > >it happens in fields of engineering and biotechnology, that the >legal/economic ramifications of a "practical" (vis-a-vis purely >academic) thesis can result in nasty tangles. There was a recent case >from (I believe) the University of Florida, in which the University >sued the student for all rights to any developments arising from his >thesis work. He refused to hand in his lab notebooks and ended up >arrested. I can see that if DS wanted to keep the intellectual >property of his work, he could not have "finished" the disseration. > >>>2b. Mr. Smart quit his program or was terminated due to performance >>>issues. > >>More like an anger control issue got him thrown out. > >Again, Why? Because you say so? Or because you have some data and/or >information that the rest of this NG lacks? Or, let me guess, because >no supporting data is necessary because we are talking about DEREK >SMART, which veryone knows HAS to be wrong, has to lie, has to < >> > >>> He may, or may not have a MS degree. He does not have a >>>written dissertation. > >>Hey Derek got an MS ? > >He probably has; so what is the point again? > >>>3. Mr. Smart does NOT have a Ph.D., under any stretch of imagination. >>Ture ! > >As the official definition of a PhD in the US. It does not mean that >he would not have attended, participated, progressed, etc, etc in a >Graduate Program. > >>> >>>JAM >>>Assistant Professor >>>BA, Princeton U. >>>PhD Albert Einstein College of Medicine >>> >>> >>>PS Do I get, O mighty Billhuff/fhth, an honorary degree in Derekology? >>> >>You get to go to the head of the class ! > >Well, I was trying to be funny/cynical, but I guess I missed the mark. >Like, making lite of the whole dumb idea of "Derekology". NOT of >"Derek" but of the fact that some people REALLY have too much time in >their hands. For the record, I don't care for either BillHuff/fhth >postings regarding DK and/or BC3K. Either make comments about the >program or move on. I don't care about personal postings; I read some >of the BC3K posts out of amusement, and waiting to see if the game is >worth it. The last space sim I enjoyed playing was Imperium galactum >in my C64. > >>>PSS I have no clue as to whether the game is good or not; I am not >>>into space sims. If the final (!!??) version kicks ass, maybe I will >>>try it. > >>There will never be a final version only promises of one. > >And this is based on what information? so it goes... >On Sun, 19 Oct 1997 15:10:16 GMT, snsn@skjs.com wrote: > >>Kind of sounds like the tabasco industry leader saying the don't > ~ >>believe smoking causes cancer, >> >Well, there is nothing wrong with that "spicy" comment ; ) !!! >(sorry.... could not resist) >> >>If you say so Derek. >>BTW Do you beleive smoking causes cancer ? > >And about a dozen other major medical problems... > >>Please what was that experts name that backs up your story ? >>???? > >That would have been me; I am an Assistant Professor who performs >biomedical research at a PhD granting Institution. Does Derek Smart >have a PhD? I do not know for sure, in the truest sense of the word. >However, I reached the conclusion that he probably did finish at least >97-98% of all that is necessary to complete a PhD program (and maybe >the whole thing). I also believe that there are rational, real reasons >as to why DK would not have published his dissertation. I wrote about >them in another thread (A question for Derek Smart..). > >Would I hire him for my lab? Sure, depending on how much salary he >wanted . > >Would I buy his game? Sure, depending SOLELY on the quality of the >game. > >Would I NOT buy his game because of flames by all the Derekologists? >Are you f**ing kidding me? Would you believe ANYTHING by these >individuals regarding BC3K gameplay? > >Would I buy the game if proven that DS has no PhD? Same answer as >above; sure, depending SOLELY on the quality of the game. > >DEREK SMART IS A FRIGGING _G_A_M_E_D_E_V_E_L_O_P_E_R !!! Not your >doctor, not your teacher, not your government. "Credibility"??? Are >you KIDDING me? Is there ANYONE in the gaming industry that has NOT >lied/exagerated about features? release dates? hardware compatibility? > >face it, the derekologists are just having their fun at the expense of >a human being who, worst case scenario, here> into buying a $40 game that was unplayable. If that is the >worst thing that anyopne has done to you, well kid, come out of the >bubble and smell the outside air, full of bugs and vermin. > >there, I feel better now. > >PS> when I upgrade my computer, I will definitively buy V2.0. and goes... >>JMarti said: >> >>>That would have been me; I am an Assistant Professor who performs >>>biomedical research at a PhD granting Institution. Does Derek Smart >>>have a PhD? I do not know for sure, in the truest sense of the word. >>>However, I reached the conclusion that he probably did finish at least >>>97-98% of all that is necessary to complete a PhD program (and maybe >>>the whole thing). I also believe that there are rational, real reasons >>>as to why DK would not have published his dissertation. I wrote about >>>them in another thread (A question for Derek Smart..). >> >>A few simple questions, intended as serious ones. Granted that Derekologists >> like to pick on Derek because (if nothing else) we think he's an asshole, but >> there are people here including Derekologists, PhD's, and others, who are >> convinced beyond any serious doubt that Derek's alleged PhD is a complete >> fraud, and his behavior surrounding the PhD issue deserving of continued >> attack. Note that I'll deliberately ignore inflamatory issues such as the >> fake name, history of lying, etc. Also note that if you ignore or evade this >> and similar queries, you're going to look like a stooge (that's a friendly >> warning). > >What?! Just because I "dare" to post a dissenting view (from yours, >that is) I "look like a stooge"? A warning about evading your queries? >Talk about being predisposed.... Look at the evidence, and just the >evidence: > >>First of all, you seem convinced that Derek Smart's alleged PhD dissertation is >> not published, which is obvious. Here are the questions: >> >>1) When Derek Smart said "it's published and it's listed" (see link below for >> full text), do you think he was lying? For instance, do you think there is >> any reasonable explanation for him to act like the thing was published and >> listed (until Bill and others proved otherwise), when according to your >> explanations the only way to "suppress" a dissertation would be to actively >> participate in a process that would keep it hidden (leaving aside the reasons >> why a dissertation could be suppressed). Could he have "forgotten"? > >I do not know if he lied or not for sure, and neither do you, BillH. >or any other Derekologist. I am a scientist and use the scientific >method to reach conclusions. NO ONE has definite proof of DS PhD or >lack thereoff. From the above the ONLY conclusion you can reach is >that: > >1. Using the available search engines, a thesis under the name of >Derek Smart (and the variations that you tested) was not found. >Nothing else, nothing more. If his PhD is a complete fraud, you would >not have found the listing. If his PhD was not published due to >patent/copyright issues, you would not have found the listing either. >Using the data available, and ONLY the data available, you cannot >diffrentiate between the two. > >2. Derek said that the disseration was "published and it's listed". >Published were? As a paper in a peer-reviewed scientific journal? Use >the search engines/indexes to search for Journal articles (different >from thesis absatrcts). As an abstarct for a scientific meeting? >Search for that too; meeting abstrarcts are usually published as >journal supplements. As a dissertation? Most, if not all, science and >engineering disserattions are not published in toto. You won't find it >here. As a dissertation abstract? That's what you did; you did not >find it there. As a paper in a non-peer-reviewed scientific journal? >Impossible to find out, since these are usually not listed/indexed. >In conclusion, you really can only eliminate the main listing of >abstracts as a source of DS "publishing" comment. He could be lying; >he could have published and listed his thesis in his alma mater's >journal. Could he have exagerated the "importance" of the publishing >source? (ie bragging about publication when the absatrct was only >listed in his home department's journal) Maybe; I can see that >happening. > >>2) What leads you to believe that Derek Smart has ever been in a graduate class >> in Computer Science, under the direction of a faculty advisor, or been >> involved in anything remotely related to a PhD program? > >What makes you believe otherwise? Can you prove, a priori, that I am >really not a nut case, waiting for the next comet and buying black >Nikes? Can you prove that I am a Nobel Laurate? You cannot do either. >Not at all. And neither can you prove that DS has NOT been in a >graduate class, and no one can prove that he HAS been in a graduate >class. > >Of course, if you believe that he is an habitual liar, then, of >course, you may think that you are right. I see, on the other hand, >that it would be pretty stupid for someone to put "PhD" after their >name without having SOMETHING to back it up with. You will probably >reply that DS is just that; therefore he is who he is (and so on). >Fine, have your fun. But speaking only from the available data, you >cannot PROVE anything (and neither can I). Notice that I am NOT >defending the stance that DS HAS a PhD; I am expounding the idea that >he COULD have a PhD. > >>3) Why do you think Derek Smart would choose to not reveal the name of the >> school where he obtained the alleged PhD, regardless of whether the alleged >> dissertation is indexed, published, or whatnot? > >I listed the reasons on a previous thread (A question for DS....). >Moreover, he may have other reasons which may have nothing to do with >his degree (or lack thereof). Maybe the school is not an "Ivy-league" >type. Maybe his real name is goofy-sounding. Maybe he does not want >his alma mater to ask him for donations for the computer dept. :) >There are just too many variables involved.... > >>fthx, PhD (Derekology) > >Now I have a question for you. You (or/and other derekologists) failed >to find his thesis indexed. But that was not a scientifically correct >experiment. You need a "positive control"; that is, some one who DOES >have a PhD to make sure that you get a "positive hit" with your search >strategy. (A "negative control" would be someone without a thesis, of >course, like Elvis Presley). > >So, here it is: look for mine, using only the same info as you had >from Derek = his name. > >James Martiney > >Now, don't cheat and use Deja News, because you will probably find >postings in some bio/sci ngs with my full sig. And I think I mentioned >my alma mater at some point. If you find my thesis, then you can be >confortable that you used the right strategy to look for Derek's. > >And do it fast, since I will be leaving cyberspace Nov 1 (just moving, >I am not going to ride any comets :) > >And remember, use the scientific method. Formulate a hypothesis. Test >the model. Gather data. Don't speculate! Leave emotions aside; be >thorough and anal-compulsive. > >I am tired, and I must now go play in my lab bench. Maybe I will work >on that anthrax bomb...... > > >James P?h?D? Martiney and goes... >On 26 Dec 1997, Bill Huffman wrote: > >> In article <67t42f$fci@mtinsc05.worldnet.att.net>, >> Derek Smart wrote: >> > >> >When Bill took off looking for my thesis, I knew for a fact that >> >he wouldn't find it but I was curious to see where it would go.... >> >and (d) I don't have to prove anything to you or anyone. Furthermore, I > refuse to succumb to emotional blackmail. >> *material snipped* >> ... >> I've seen. Historically, whenever anyone had asked about details >> he was strangely silent. The biggest braggart many have ever >> seen being silent on such occasions seemed very "out of >> character". This coupled with my observation of many months >> of Derek lies, lead me to conclude that Derek's PhD was >> likely fake. After gathering further evidence, I believe this >> is now an inescapable conclusion. > > You know this thread should end when people start sending canned >posts back and forth. > >> >> Fact 1: Derek Smart is not listed in DAI. > MISCONCEPTION 1: You yourself admit in this thread that you searched UMI >and other databases. This implies that DAI is not comprehensive, which >means several peoples abstracts would come up blank on a search, let >alone Derek's elusive one. You still haven't shown that all of UMI let >alone other Abstract databases are covered in DAI. > >>Fact 2: Derek is unable to provide simple information. >MISCONCEPTION 2: There's a difference between unwilling and unable. >unable (WorldBook defintion): lacking ability or power to. >unwilling(" "):not freely granted or done. >Derek has always stated that he's been unwilling to succumb to >"blackmail". Although this is suspicious, he doesn't have to tell you >where he went. Other people have stated that he went to school for higher >learning; I'm surprised with all of your effort to bring him down you >still haven't determined where he went. > > Fact 3: Derek Smart has changed the story about his PhD. > >MISCONCEPTION 3: Changing a story and having a PhD are NOT MUTUALLY >EXCLUSIVE. Brow raising, yes, HARD CONCLUSIVE proof, not by a long shot. > > > >> CONCLUSION >> If someone claims they have a PhD and it couldn't be found >> in DAI, you'd be suspicious. If they claimed they did a >> dissertation and it couldn't be found in DAI you'd be >> extremely suspicious of the PhD. > Isn't this redundant? Besides you've admitted DAI is not >comprehensive. > > > If someone claims they have a PhD but, won't name their school, > you'd be very suspicious. >> If they could name their school and put to shame and be rid of >> a bunch of "detractors" but, still don't name their school, you'd >> have to be extremely suspicious. When you put all that together >> with fact that very important parts of Derek's "PhD story" has >> changed, I believe it proves that Derek doesn't have a PhD. > This is pure speculation. I can come up with a reason why he does >this just to annoy you. Does that validate my cliam and negate yours? >You can say he's being evasive and hiding something or beligerent and >taunting you with his refusal. Neither is valid enough to support either. > > Brian Bax > and goes... >On 28 Dec 1997, Bill Huffman wrote: > > *material snipped* >> >> I've talked to two librarians that have said DAI is comprehensive. UMI was >> searched, as I understand it, because sometimes they can show up in UMI >> before DAI. If your point is that it could have been missed then, you >> must have missed the fact that Derek now admits it's not listed. Did you >> also miss the first paragraph of your post? Those are Derek's own words. > > Fine, that's all I wanted to hear. Haven't gotten to my librarian >yet. I assume it's comprehensive for all of Europe as well? I'm fully >aware that Derek has changed his story. Although circumspect, there are >other alternatives that you haven't disproven yet. > >> >>Fact 2: Derek is unable to provide simple information. >> >MISCONCEPTION 2: There's a difference between unwilling and unable. >> >unable (WorldBook defintion): lacking ability or power to. >> >unwilling(" "):not freely granted or done. >> >Derek has always stated that he's been unwilling to succumb to >> >"blackmail". Although this is suspicious, he doesn't have to tell you >> >where he went. Other people have stated that he went to school for higher >> >learning; I'm surprised with all of your effort to bring him down you >> >still haven't determined where he went. >> >> Unable versus unwilling is not a substantive argument. > > Actually, it's better that yours. Derek has said he doesn't want to. >You have not shown one shred of evidence showing that Derek hasn't been to >any school for an advanced degree. Other people not affiliated with Derek >have said he has been to an advanced school. Your argument is less >substantive than Derek's on this point. > >> How do you propose finding Derek's alleged none existent school >> of higher learning? What is it supposed to mean that it hasn't >> been found? Are you arguing that it therefore must not exist? > > I'm not the one with the holy crusade to bring down Derek Smart. >I'm sure you're more than capable of finding it, if you put your mind to >it, or you can get one of your fellow Derekologists to find it. I mean, >the data should be easy to find. It's not invading any privacy >issues right? > >*material snipped* >> I've been told that DAI is comprehensive. >> >> It is rare but possible to get a PhD WITHOUT a dissertation. >> For example, for extraordinary experimental work , etc. However, >> if the person claims they did a dissertation then, that eliminates >> this type of PhD "program". > > Or maybe a supressed dissertation? Course I still haven't heard > from a group of PhD's in CS saying that it's impossible under ANY >circumstance for a supressed dissertation. Maybe I missed them. > >> > > If someone claims they have a PhD but, won't name their school, >> > you'd be very suspicious. >> >> If they could name their school and put to shame and be rid of >> >> a bunch of "detractors" but, still don't name their school, you'd >> >> have to be extremely suspicious. When you put all that together >> >> with fact that very important parts of Derek's "PhD story" has >> >> changed, I believe it proves that Derek doesn't have a PhD. >> > This is pure speculation. I can come up with a reason why he does >> >this just to annoy you. Does that validate my cliam and negate yours? >> >You can say he's being evasive and hiding something or beligerent and >> >taunting you with his refusal. Neither is valid enough to support either. >> >> Any single piece of the argument can, of course, be reasonably argued. >> The strength is when all of the facts are taken together. There is no >> evidence pointing to a real PhD, except the word of one Derek Smart. >> If it were true that he had a PhD, it could be very easily proven by >> naming his school. Everything else makes a very strong argument that >> the PhD is phony. For example, any piece of evidence against OJ Simpson >> can be argued for months, and was. The case taken as a whole, proves >> OJ's guilt. > >This is the crux of the matter, because the school would either prove >your claim beyond a reasonable doubt, or blow you completely out of these >threads forever. You have a piece of evidence and some suspicions and you >claim to have an airtight proof withiout disproving the other >possiblities, one which Derek claims. State that you have a >case instaed of proof against Derek, until you can verify that Derek >didn't attend a school for higher learning. > > Brian Bax > and goes... >On Tue, 20 Jan 1998, Dan Brooks wrote: >> >> Bill Huffman wrote in message <6a01t3$ejk@si611.SanDiegoCA.NCR.COM>... >> >In article <69vqdo$d0g@mtinsc02.worldnet.att.net> >> >Derek Smart wrote: >> >>On 19 Jan 98 13:43:29 GMT, foxtwo@bigfoot.com.sg (Elite) wrote: >> >> >SUMMARY >> >Here's the proof that Derek's PhD is a fraud. It consists of three >> >firmly established facts. >> >FACT 1: Derek Smart is not listed in DAI. > >> > All published PhD dissertations are listed in DAI. > > So I actually went to the library to check out Bill "airtight" >verification about DAI. I went to the reference section to read about >DAI since we have the hard-bound copies and not the CD-ROM. This CAN >be verified, unlike Bill's claims with his librarian. > > The following is referenced from: >Dissertation Abstracts International >Part B-the Sciences and Engineering >Volume 58, No. 1 >July 1997 [They don't have a more recent copy yet] >page iii > It follows: > > Dissertation Abstract International (DAI) is published monthly by >UMI Company and includes abstracts of doctoral dissertations submitted to >UMI by 550 participating institutions in North America and throughout the >world. > > Each author-prepared abstract, upto 350 words in length, describes >in detail the original research project on which the dissertation is >based. MOST [NOT ALL] of the approximately 45,000 dissertations published >by UMI each year are abstracted in DAI and may be purchased in microfilm >or as paper copies. > > DAI is published in three sections: > > [Section A+B are just sections of various academic disciplines, CS >is in Section B]. > > Section C- Worlwide (formerely European Abstracts) is publsihed >quarterly and includes abstracts of dissertations in all disciplines >accepted for doctoral and post-doctoral degrees at institutions throughout >the world. Most of these dissertations ARE NOT AVAILABLE FROM UMI [which >is the only databse DAI uses]; those which are for sale are also listed in >Section A or B. Beginning with Volume 50 (spring 1989), DAI-C was >expanded to include institutions worldwide. > >____ > What does this show? DAI admits that they are not a comprehenisve >dissertation archive database. They only use the UMI database. so if you >went to a school that wasn't one of those 550 schools YOU WOULD NEVER SHOW >UP IN DAI. Even so, they don't list all of the ones submitted to them. > > Talking with my librabrian, she told met that if you did your >thesis in Europe as in France, the filing system is completely different >than the American one. It has been suggested that Derek did his work >abroad so it would be very easy to miss him in DAI. More importantly >if Derek did do his degree abroad greater than eight years ago (which is >very possible since he's been working on BC3K for 7-8 years) HE WOULD >NEVER SHOW ON DAI. Again, HE WOULD NEVER SHOW UP ON DAI. It's a current >database, not retroactive one. > > So DAI by their own admission states that they are not a >comprehensive database. What does this mean. I'll reiterate what Dan >said. Bill's initial premise that DAI has all PhD abstracts is TOTALLY >BOGUS. I've posted several times that is was likely that DAI is not a >comprehensive database, a good one, but not all inclusive. > >> >FACT 2: Derek is unable to provide simple information. >> > Derek is unable to name his alma mater, among other things. >> >> >> Unable? Try unwilling. There is a difference. That's like you not giving >> me your SSN. Unable? No. Unwilling? Yep. You are now o-fer-two. > > I'll agree with Dan on this one. This is speculation and totally >subjective. Plus others on this newsgroup have stated that Derek did go >to a schhol for an advanced degree, not a mail-order school as some have >jeered. Huffman has never offered on shred of evidence to the contrary. > >> >FACT 3: Derek Smart has changed the story about his PhD. >> > He said his dissertation was published now, he says it's not. >> >> >> I'll take that one at your word. You are 1-fer-three. > > I admit that this is not the normal protocol, but becuase Derek >has changed his story does not exclude him form having a PhD, not by a >long shot. > >*Snipeed Dan's good rebutal* > > The "airtight" proof falls flat on it's face at premise one with >DAI not being comprehensive. All you have is a subjective point of view >for your proof, which doesn't hold up to the naked eye. I suggest that >you stop posting these futile rants until you find something that has SOME >substance unlike this bunk you've been posting for the last two months. > > > > Brian Bax and goes... >On 18 Feb 1998, Bill Huffman wrote: > > > >> PERSONAL INFORMATION?? Dear sir, that is total BS. An alma mater is >> not personal information, especially when "advertising" the degree >> earned with every post. I have never meet a real PhD that wouldn't >> jump at the chance to talk about their school and their studies, >> especially their dissertation. Plus, if Derek considers it so personal >> then why does he claim it is all explained in his "soon to be released >> biography"? Derek Smart is just a pathological liar that made up >> his PhD in order to impress people. There is no credible reason for >> Derek not divulging his alma mater, except that it's not true. > > Well Bill that's your opinion. And that's all it is. People can >choose what they want to tell other people, there is no requirement no >matter how deeply you want to believe it. Not unless you've been promoted >to C.S.I.P.G.S. Supreme Commander, then you can dictate what people can >say =). > >> >> All dissertations are supposed to be listed. Derek admits that his is >> not. He's never explained that. Derek used to claim that his dissertation >> was listed and published until it was proved that it was not. What is >> your explanation for that lie? The only reasonable explanation is that >> Derek Smart is a habitual liar committing PhD fraud. If you don't see >> that then who is being a fool? > > Well there's that word "supposed" in there. You and i both know >that all are not listed, the question is what qualifies as "not being" >listed. Derek gave an answer, you choose not to believe it. Fine. BTW >you've never proved anything except that he's not listed in DAI which does >not include. > 1) Derek going to a school not of the 550 listed in DAI. > > 2) Derek getting his doctorate before his university joined the > UMI/European Abstract archive ( which is very likely if he earned > his degree overseas). > > Move on Bill. > > Brian and goes... >I was recently pointed towards Bill Huffman's webpage where space is devoted >to the "PhD Fraud." [Why does "get a life" keep coming to mind? LOL.] I >apologize for anyone not interested and suggest to move on to another post >immediately. If you want the website address, contact Huffman, not me. > >I found the site to be Huffman's typical attempt to provide "proof" of a >"fraud," using generous doses of innuendo and omission, and falsehood. To >wit; > >Huffman says; >"I called Karen Kaltz at UMI. She said that even if the dissertation has >been 'suppressed' . . . it will still be listed in DAI." > >Karen Kalts says this is not true. [I prefer the term 'bullshit."] I >spoke to Karen this AM, via the phone number Huffman provided. DAI includes >abstracts [or summaries if abstracts are not made available] for >dissertations that Universities provide to UMI. Karen says if a University >and a PhD candidate determine not to provide information, that is between >them. An abstract/summary is *not* included for a suppressed dissertation. >Karen is not aware of the procedure used to suppress a dissertation and >suspects it differs from school to school. > >Huffman is either lying or hard of hearing. Either way, his first point is >baloney. Period. > >Huffman's information that all [accredited] US schools with the exception of >MIT provide information for listing in DAI is partially correct, according >to Karen. Summaries of the MIT dissertations are still included. Canada >also provides information on all dissertations. > >Huffman says; >"Regarding DAI coverage in England" [Great Britain, actually] "from 1989 to >1993 the coverage in DAI is excellent, 100%." > >Karen confirms this, though says there are "probably" some exceptions that >she is not aware of. Coverage prior to and since that period is "spotty at >best" according to Karen. Using Huffman's figures of 25-30% [which Karen >said sounds "about right"] that means that at least 7 in 10 dissertations >"written" outside of that period are *not* included in *any way shape or >form* in DAI information. Get it Huffman? Most dissertations outside that >period are invisible to DAI. No trace. Nada. Unless Huffman is relying on >Derek's dissertation being written during *that* 89-93 period, this period >is totally pointless in the discussion and offered in an attempt to cloud >the issue. What a surprise. As to possible "supression" even during that >89-93 period . . . read on. > >Huffman says; [this is where it Huffman's logic completely fails him and >his lie surfaces] > >"I don't know for sure whether or not 'suppressed' dissertations would still >be listed. When Karen made her statement that even 'suppressed' >dissertations would still be listed we were discussing the USA >dissertations. However, since they are listed in the USA I would expect >them to be listed in England, as well." > >Point One - Karen says she does *not* say that 'suppressed' dissertations >are 'still listed.' Get it? NOT. She says dissertations that do not >include an abstract, *but* include summary information are included. A >"suppressed" dissertation *does not exist* as far as DAI is concerned. No >abstract, no summary, no nothing. Huffman is again either lying or hard of >hearing. > >Point Two - Assuming that what goes for the US goes for England is patently >self-serving and blatantly stupid. However, Huffman lucked into this one, >in a sense. According to Karen, just as 'suppression' is an issue between >the University and the student in the US, she 'assumes' it to be the case in >Great Britain as well. She stresses she has *no* knowledge of the >suppression process, but confirms that a suppressed dissertation, nor it's >abstract, nor it's summary is included in DAI. > >I'll summarize using Huffman's lead-off in his "UMI Said What's Listed" >section of his webpage. > >"The vast majority of colleges in the USA and England use UMI/DAI to list >and make their dissertations available." > >BULLSHIT. Coverage prior to 1989, and for the last 4-5 years in Great >Britain is 25-30%. "Spotty at best," according to Karen. The vast majority >in the US participate, but oustside of the US and Canada coverage is very >weak. Just like Huffman's continued joke of an expose. > >Dan Brooks and goes... >Analyst wrote in message <6eps5s$2q4@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>... >> >>Whoops, hey Derek, don't forget...to prove libel, you need to prove >>that the statement made (ie, you have no Ph.D.) is untrue. ...Believe >>me, a court, like most people here, will never believe your "I don't >>want to tell where I went to school, but I have a Ph.D." bullshit. > >No shit. Don't you think that he is prepared to settle this thing once and >for all in court? He can get a judge to supress the details of the case [at >least the issue of where his PhD is from if he gives sufficient cause], and >if the defendants decide to talk about it get them in trouble again. If >what you believe is true, that Derek has no PhD, then would he really be >willing to go to court with this?? > >Look, face the facts one and all - Derek is one stubborn S.O.B. I write >software for a living, I have for many years, and I have NEVER been as >intense about anything I've written as Derek is about BC3K. If I stop >getting paid for what I code, I stop working on it. Derek seems to be >lacking this type of common sense . > >Derek gets screwed by his publisher, he continues to upgrade and update the >game [btw - this doesn't make sense to me, I'd of left them holding the ball >on it]. Derek doesn't want to lose the rights to BC3K, he works a deal with >Take2 to get it back [Why? The game is as good as dead at that point in >time.]. Derek continues to work on BC3K, and goes looking for a new >publisher. They tell him its out of date, a few years ago maybe it would of >worked, but the technology is out of date. Drop the game and do something >else. Does Derek drop it? No, he upgrades again to 3D and Win95 platform. >He says he's going to add multiplayer support. This guy, against common >sense and conventional wisdom, doesn't give up. Now, you may not like is >online persona. Sometimes he looses his mind when responding to people who >flame him. And I think we all agree [Derek included] that he has been known >to respond to issues without thinking, saying some things he probably >shouldn't of. Seriously though, you got to admire his "Never say die" >attitude. Stop for a minute and look inside yourself. When have any of >you, of us, EVER been that passionate about anything? > >This is only my impression on how it transpired, but I'm usually pretty good >about reading people. Derek puts the PhD by his name because he deserves >it. Some flammer, instead of asking nicely about his PhD, starts to insult >Derek about it. When said flammer demands to know where the PhD is from, >Derek doesn't feel like telling him. Maybe out of spite, maybe because he >doesn't want to give the flammer the satisfaction of getting personal info >out of him, maybe just because he didn't feel like it.... who knows. No >matter how the events transpired, one fact remains - As stubborn is Derek >is, once he made the decision not to tell, guess what... HE AIN'T GOING TO >TELL. > >Personally, I don't give a fat rats ass [Geez - hope theres not a >alt.rats.asses news group] if Derek has a degree of any sort. All a degree >has ever proven to me is that someone is really good at going to school. >I've worked with people that had a masters, and were loosy people to work >with. Also worked with people who got their schooling in a Tech school and >were kick ass programmers & employees. Actions speak louder than words [or >letters]. In my mind, BC3K speaks a hell of alot louder than the rantings >of some flammer who hides behind an alias. Ever notice the commonality >between most of the really hard core Derek haters? They A) use an alias, >B) Have a "Why I hate Derek Smart" website, and C) Never have a website that >say's who they are or what they've done with their life to make their >opinion matter. > >- Rich W. - Mark Asher bows out of the flamewar on 8/27/97, as did Krud and several others. D. Smart leaves, briefly, but returns, foolishly. >Things have hit bottom with the whole BC3K fiasco. I'm distressed over >contributing to it in some ways. I've prided myself on being clever and >satirical at times, but too often I've responded out of a sense of >indignation. I haven't always been as nice as I am in real life. It doesn't >really matter that Derek probably deserved it, it still wasn't nice. Usenet >has a way of unleashing the beast, I suppose. > >This latest round of Derek bashing has struck me as too personal and too >much, however. I agree with many people that Derek has been less than >forthcoming with the truth -- I tend to attribute this to his overwhelming >desire to rationalize away any mistakes he makes that threaten his ego. He >needs to 'fess up to an extent and shoulder the blame and not point >fingers. I and others have told him this, but it never sinks in. Derek has >fanned the Usenet flames with his attitude and comments, and I don't think >he really understands how or why. > >But now Derek is beset with accusations about his Ph.D. I simply can't be a >part of this. I believe he has one, and he has contacted me and offered to >furnish me with any kind of proof I ask for that he can deliver. Derek >doesn't want to parade this about in public on Usenet, and I can't blame >him. How demeaning. Nor will I ask him to deliver proof to me. He signs his >name with a Ph.D. and that's good enough for me. Derek is very distressed >over this, and right or wrong, shibboleth or shabby game producer, he's >still a fellow person in a bit of psychic pain right now. I can empathize. > >So I'm bowing out, with a reminder to everyone who has slammed or defended >Derek, that Derek has loomed larger than life in some ways, even if he's >been villian to many and been wrong more often than right. But no matter >what you think of him, he's energized many of us -- Nai-Chi was moved to >write his exceedingly clever FAQ; fthx took on the role of dogged >researcher, convinced that the truth was out there in dejanews; Jonathan >Normington has added many a droll comment; Commander Krud took on the role >of Double-Naught 7 and infiltrated bc3000ad.com back when it was still >padlocked; and others have pitched in with their funny comments or words >made all the more immediate because of the emotion behind them, emotion >that took on life due to Derek's Usenet personna. We've enjoyed it, and we >have Derek to thank for our enjoyment. > >All I can do is urge you to just drop it. Just drop it. Just drop the whole >BC3K fiasco. It's taken a mean turn and I'm not hitching a ride on it >anymore. Who knows what avenue it will careen onto next? > >Now I'll end by waxing a bit poetical, since I'm feeling melancholy now. >Here's the ending from a W.B. Yeats poem that has always been a kind of >touchstone for me when I need to get over anger or sadness. Suffice it to >say that I know these few lines "by heart": > >"When such as I cast out remorse > So great a sweetness flows into the breast > That we must laugh, and we must sing. > We are blessed by everything. > Everything we look upon is blest." > >Take care, Derek supporters and bashers, and Derek, be nice and don't snap. >I'm outta here. I've got an Age of Empires beta to play! > >Mark Asher and more than 8,000 or more posts later >On Wed, 03 Jun 98 18:01:03 GMT, erevans@NOSPAMkiva.net (Eric Evans) wrote: > >> See, that's exactly the thing. I think it IS great that he (or any >>other developer) makes himself available in this manner, when he isn't being >>vitriolic, as he seems to be pretty helpful seeing as how he has a pretty in >>depth knowledge of the topic. Lately I feel like he's making an effort at not >>bashing his users and it's cool to see interaction on that level. >> But when I see him fighting with his users, people who are supporting him by >>using his product, it sours me on him and his game. Normally, I would shrug >>and go on with my life but in the past he's displayed some pretty nasty >>behaviour and I've allowed myself to mock him for it. > >[I know I'm going to regret this. But I'll start giving a shit when someone >else starts paying my bills] > >You have a gang of wannabes here that jump on every thread and every post I >make because they have nothing else in their pathetic pitiful life to do. No, >not all of them are teenagers just probably trailer park trash with no goals in >life who just happened to have access to a computer. They're the kind of people >that go through life wishing they had done something with their lifes other >than constructing the ill will of others and at age 45 wonder why they're on >the dole or standing in the welfare line. > >For instance, Jimmy, sixball, Ribo et al have been here for quite some time. >They've been beat up, shut up, fucked up and jacked up so many times, it's like >a drug to keep in the flamefest because they CANNOT discuss games or ANYTHING >meaningful. No matter which group I'm in or which thread I post to, you can >always count on them being there to taint, twist and tarnish the thread with >irrelevant and inconsequential bullshit. > >They revel in calling me a liar over issues that cannot be proven, disputes >that cannot be settled and issues that are what they are, issues. In this day >and age where games are late each month, there is always a chance that some >jackoff is going to call me a liar because I over estimated a patch schedule, a >liar because I won't tell where I got my Ph.D. from (in lieu of my desire to >NOT give that other celebrated a-little-more-than-minimum-wage-earning-asshole, >Bill Huffman a free ticket out this one, considering all the aggravation he's >caused me) and everything else you can think of. > >Meanwhile, my game franchise continues to progress in leaps and bounds, >continues to defy all odds for a game that should've died in 1996. A game that >continues to remain in the spotlight, a game that is more advanced than >ANYTHING out there in it's genre. A game, that two years later, is STILL a hot >game, kicks some serious ass and still gets played. It's painful for them >because I should've failed, but I didn't. The new reviews were shocking to >everyone who thought the game was as bad as these assholes made it to be. It >has, again, been mentioned in Yahoo Internet Life as the top 5 download for >Gamespot (May), it's STILL in the top 5 jojo internet chart, I get support from >all the big names in the dev support industry, it's, again in the June issue of >CGS+, the July/Aug of PC Games, over 19, count that, NINETEEN magazines >worldwide since March and I am STILL here with the most dedicated following >that games this side of Elite haven't seen. And THAT was a darn fine game. > >So, this whole mess is a personal vendetta because these assholes just can't >help but be jealous that the existence of their own meaningless, pitiful lives >continues to defy logic and so they come here to rile a man who wouldn't >otherwise give them a cursory glance in the street let alone exchange a >greeting. The kind of idiots you shy away from at trade shows and invert your >name tag hoping that they don't know what you look like from the numerous pics >they've seen in mags, on the net or in the bathroom walls of their spouses > Everyone is a big man behind a keyboard and monitor so it's easy to >flex the sociopathic muscles since anything short of pulling the legs of >roaches in their homes is akin to boredom. > >Go to Dejanews and use their email addresses as a search criteria and see how >many on topic posts these fools make. > >Meet the usual suspects: > >When sixball jumps in a games topic, he seems so out of place you can compare >him to an unducated janitor that stumbled in a kindergarten classroom. Dan >Brooks, Pat Muller and a bunch of others have punched so many holes in his >degenerate karma, you could use his brain for a sieve and drain spaghetti on >it. Then serve it to him. Once day he was so disjointed and shoved his foot so >far down his throat, he blamed his innocent kid for making a stupid post! Dan >beat him so bad over that one, I almost called for the medics. Seeing his >continued crap being spewed here, I'd say he hasn't recovered and that poor kid >must still wondering what' he'd done to deserve this. Then he shows up one day, >posts under an alias, pretending it wasn't him and got busted. > >Jimmy, well, he's Jimmy. Didn't know a thing, doesn't know a thing and too dumb >to know anything. Always jumping on someone's post to give his worthless 2c >you'd think twice about giving him change for a nickel. 'nuf said. > >Bill Huffman is just an asshole, out on a limb, up to his ass is so much shit, >he's the ONLY one who doesn't know it yet. He's heard the word TENACITY >associated with Derek Smart, but he STILL doesn't get it. Once NCR finds out >what he's been up to (as they will once this issue gets to court) he'll be out >of a job because then he'll have to explain where in his job profile did it say >he could post usenet messages on company time. Yes, he has two addresses and we >have an entire database of EVERY posts he's ever made regarding Derek Smart or >BC3K. When you're making a little over minimum wage and have several mouths to >feed with NO job skills whatsoever and have changed jobs more than the IRS can >keep up with, you pick your fights. > >Riboflavin. Think about it for a minute. With a handle like that, why would you >even take this degenerate seriously? I think the only way to deal with Ribo is >to stick a bag over your head in case the bag over his head breaks. > >fthx. Read his posts. Go to the website he dedicated to my honor. Ask him what >he does for a living. Ask him about his favorite game. Ask him when was the >last time he actually got laid. You'll get your impression there and then. If >internet stalking is a crime, this jackoff is the poster boy. Even AOL can't >contain him and they let anyone in. > >The rest of the crew including JackyO and all the others (see above list) that >post using aliases because it just kinda looks better when you have more >assholes than not. I didn't think 'strength in numbers' had anything to do >with cowardice, but then again, that's just me. They are just on the band wagon >because it's cool to be bad when you're nobody and headed nowhere. I guess >picking on someone with a name and who is a recognized figure, gives you a warm >and fuzzy feeling inside. What he does at times like that is anyone's guess. > >And you THINK these degenerates are my 'users'? > >ps. Any pretentious asshole who posts saying I'm a 'professional' and should >exercise better judgement and all this shit, can kiss my ass. You've got your >degree and I've got mine (several). If you used yours for toilet paper or it's >worthless 'cause you're stuck in a dead end job where nobody knows your name, >too bad, you should'a made a copy or better yet, jumped off the train this >morning. I am who I am, I'm proud of who I am and sure as hell love who I am. >So, fuck off! > >Sincerely yours > >A professional developer -- Derek Smart, Ph.D. Designer/Lead Developer Battlecruiser:3000AD "The man who follows the crowd will usually get no further than the crowd. The man who walks alone is likely to find himself in places no one has ever been." ICQ : 158435 Email : mailto:dsmart@pobox.com Media Contact : mailto:bc3000ad.media@mindspring.com World Wide Web : www.bc3000ad.com BC3K Latest News : www.bc3000ad.com/temp/gnn.html Active Worlds : Teleport to GALCOM at www.activeworlds.com