On Jul 31, 4:42 pm, help bot wrote:
On Jul 31, 2:39 am, Bruce wrote:

It is not my job, nor is it my duty to prove whether people shied away
from sponsoring USCF events because a board member is a founder and
card carrying member of the sexual freedom league and openly brags on
his website about his sexual exploits. One can never prove the
negative.

That is not a negative, dufus. The charge that Mr. Sloan
frightened away specific alleged sponsors has been
challenged, and unless it can be substantiated, those
who issued these allegations appear to have invented
their "facts".

Now, let me give you an example of proving a negative:
I say that no cow on earth has ever jumped over the moon.
I can't prove it, and my assertion is posed in the negative,
and I have no way of proving it other than the use of logic
(which for many people, amounts to incomprehensible
stuff).

But this hardly equates to the charges against Mr.
Sloan. As far as I have seen in this newsgroup, nobody
said that in their opinion, Mr. Sloan may possibly have
frightened away a potential sponsor or two. On the
contrary, a positive assertion was made that he in fact
scared off at least one specific sponsor, and this has
been challenged; the gauntlet has been thrown down.
It's High Noon, and we are eagerly waiting to see who
will show up with loaded pistols, and who will cower
and hide behind their mother's skirts. I predict a no-
contest win for Mr. Sloan (a quick draw but with very
poor aim); time will tell.

-- bad bart bot

Well name calling is certainly a major part of scoring points in a
debate. Not that I mind because I was here for 6 years and saw plenty
of name calling.

I mean that I cannot prove that something didn't happen because of
Sam, anymore than I can prove that I didn't get hired because I
belched and farted at my final interview.

I can't prove that a businessman or potential sponsor might not have
offered to sponsor an event because of being offended by Sam either in
what he wrote, what he said or his lack of personal hygiene upon
meeting him. Does that clarify what I was trying to say?