+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 98

Thread: new mystery

  1. #31
    jlockest is offline Expert Twelever Sapphire jlockest is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,667

    Default

    ...Rich..reading that back it didn't sound right.

    I don't think I have been conned - especially not financially. What I should have said is that I want to know the 'truth' of the whole matter, from inception to close (the financial 'reward' side being the least of my concerns). I'm not sure that makes any clearer what I meant either ;-(!

  2. #32
    rjuk's Avatar
    rjuk is offline Junior Twelever +1 Bronze rjuk is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    120

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jlockest View Post
    Fair comment Rich - I just don't see how you'll get the 'truth' via PPubs accounts!

    I would also like to know if I've been conned - of course I would - but, at this point we're a couple of days in. IF D had wanted to do a runner, he had 5 years. He could have changed his name and been living the life of Riley in Bangkok by now.

    D still has that final PDF - to me the only benefit I can see of knowing if they (PPubs) are actually in liquidation is to make the administrator an offer for that (as if it's an asset, it will be for sale) - so maybe there is a benefit of going that way. But I still hope that D wants to release it (as he implied) and that it's just the legal side that's stopping him at the moment.
    firstly sorry about the spelling in the last post, i was in a rush to get out.

    yes JL what you said did make sense,

    im not interested in their accounts, just if they have called in the receivers or not, its a big deal if its a hoax or a decoy

    i dont think ive been conned, as i said before ive learnt much from this, i would just like to see a proper ending.

    i dont think hes done a runner either, it seems like hes gone quiet but who can blame him, if either, his project has gone bust or hes being threatened by others unknown. (and i know how that can affect people as i earn my living in personal security)

    I hope the final PDF is released and i hope its got more Wow to it than the last 5.

    all any of us ever wanted from this was the truth and the prize, ( i gave up on the prize after a year ) so the prize has gone so all thats left is the TRUTH

    rich
    " whats the point of rhetorical questions? "

  3. #33
    Horace's Avatar
    Horace is offline Master Twelever Ruby Horace is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,483

    Default

    How will you ever find the truth if you have already presumed part of the outcome - i.e. Duncan is not a fraudster.

    At the outset I'm not saying he is or isn't.

    You start by looking at the hard evidence available.

    The first critical piece is the financial accounts. Everything in them contradicts anything Duncan has ever said about the company and the sales of the book.

    Then there is the accounts of Duncan's personal life and business management.

    Now there is the release of the solution PDFs which according to most of us appear to be a put up job. (In fact I disagree with these sentiments - certainly as they relate to the first 2 PDFs - the others do begin to stretch it but that is because we are not shown the connections between the leaps in logic which if they were shown to us might easily take us to the full solution - this is a possibility).

    It is interesting JL that you chose to put aside the evidence in the financial accounts, this is entirely in accord with your presumption that Duncan has nothing to answer for.

    I don't believe any of the evidence available is conclusive - there are many unanswered questions - and many ways of interpreting the evidence given that the full picture has not been revealed.

    In my mind the available evidence leans in one direction, however, I still give Duncan the benefit of the doubt - only just because I do want to think the best of people and be fair to them until all the facts are known.

    I have never been taken by Duncan's amiable and affable language - words are cheap. In all my years I have learned one thing if nothing else - look at what people do, not what they say.

    While there are several things that continue to trouble me about the whole affair one requires a clear answer. Duncan said that there were 9 co-discoverers, 8 of whom had chosen to hide (yes hide) in the background and have left Duncan out to dry through this whole business.

    Who are they?

    Why have they not supported Duncan and the project they initiated either morally and/or financially. When book sales failed to meet targets (all the evidence points to this - there is none available that supports to the contrary) the rejuvienation of the Maranatha Project by the Timemonk project was financed by investors? Why could not these other 8 have stumped up the money to do this? At least this?

    No where in any statement released by PP/TM has there been any reference to these people - none at all. It has always been Duncan solo (except for Tracey who appears to have been an investor). Why?

    The front of the LRB mentions that an investor commissioned the work - where has this been in all of this?

    I am going to stop here.

    JL, I have no intention of getting involved in another tiresome, interminable circular debate with you - and I say again as I started, how will you ever find the truth if you have already presumed part of the outcome.

  4. #34
    jlockest is offline Expert Twelever Sapphire jlockest is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,667

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Horace View Post
    How will you ever find the truth if you have already presumed part of the outcome - i.e. Duncan is not a fraudster.

    At the outset I'm not saying he is or isn't.

    You start by looking at the hard evidence available.

    The first critical piece is the financial accounts. Everything in them contradicts anything Duncan has ever said about the company and the sales of the book.

    Then there is the accounts of Duncan's personal life and business management.

    Now there is the release of the solution PDFs which according to most of us appear to be a put up job. (In fact I disagree with these sentiments - certainly as they relate to the first 2 PDFs - the others do begin to stretch it but that is because we are not shown the connections between the leaps in logic which if they were shown to us might easily take us to the full solution - this is a possibility).

    It is interesting JL that you chose to put aside the evidence in the financial accounts, this is entirely in accord with your presumption that Duncan has nothing to answer for.

    I don't believe any of the evidence available is conclusive - there are many unanswered questions - and many ways of interpreting the evidence given that the full picture has not been revealed.

    In my mind the available evidence leans in one direction, however, I still give Duncan the benefit of the doubt - only just because I do want to think the best of people and be fair to them until all the facts are known.

    I have never been taken by Duncan's amiable and affable language - words are cheap. In all my years I have learned one thing if nothing else - look at what people do, not what they say.

    While there are several things that continue to trouble me about the whole affair one requires a clear answer. Duncan said that there were 9 co-discoverers, 8 of whom had chosen to hide (yes hide) in the background and have left Duncan out to dry through this whole business.

    Who are they?

    Why have they not supported Duncan and the project they initiated either morally and/or financially. When book sales failed to meet targets (all the evidence points to this - there is none available that supports to the contrary) the rejuvienation of the Maranatha Project by the Timemonk project was financed by investors? Why could not these other 8 have stumped up the money to do this? At least this?

    No where in any statement released by PP/TM has there been any reference to these people - none at all. It has always been Duncan solo (except for Tracey who appears to have been an investor). Why?

    The front of the LRB mentions that an investor commissioned the work - where has this been in all of this?

    I am going to stop here.

    JL, I have no intention of getting involved in another tiresome, interminable circular debate with you - and I say again as I started, how will you ever find the truth if you have already presumed part of the outcome.
    H,
    What? I keep saying - to you and Obelixererererer and whoever. Put together the evidence D is a fraudster and I will look at your evidence and make a judgement based on that (please don't just say 'he's a fraudster') whether it 'proves' he is. I'm happy to change my mind. With what I know now, I still trust D. You post doesn't change that, as it hasn't proven anything. If Rich wants to get Companies House to say who the accountants area and blah... and finds PPubs are in liquidation - what does that prove? Does it prove that they didn't have the money in 2005? Does it prove that they don't have the secret?

    You still don't see the difference in approach. I tend to work on the 'innocent until proven guilty' rather than 'guilty until proven innocent'. Prove that he's done something wrong - and what he 's done wrong , and I'm with you. You'll see me say the same to Obelixerererer - I wanted her (him) to just prove the allegations.


    Also, I was talking about the 'truth' of the whole thing. IE it is not mutually exclusive that D didn't have the prize money at the end, but does have the 'key' (whatever that is) - and vice versa.

    BUT to me whether he had the money or not is irrelevant, as the bit I was more interested in was the 'secret'.

    What I was saying, is that the person who knows those things is D.

    Finally, what I find scary H, is in amongst your diatribe you say:
    I still give Duncan the benefit of the doubt - only just because I do want to think the best of people and be fair to them until all the facts are known.
    Which is basically what I've been saying all along. So you're right, no point ingoing round in circles as you seem to have been agreeing with me all along.

  5. #35
    Horace's Avatar
    Horace is offline Master Twelever Ruby Horace is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,483

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jlockest View Post
    Which is basically what I've been saying all along. So you're right, no point ingoing round in circles as you seem to have been agreeing with me all along.


    Precisely!

  6. #36
    Trax's Avatar
    Trax is offline Good Twelever Platinum Trax is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    652

    Default

    john - do you believe the solution offered from duncans email account is valid?

  7. #37
    Trax's Avatar
    Trax is offline Good Twelever Platinum Trax is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    652

    Default

    "How well we know what a profitable superstition this fable of Christ has been for us." Pope Leo X (1513-1521)"


    Belief, faith, or proof??? I seek the latter. All i have to go on is "alleged" correspondence. So the burden (pardon the pun) is on you John. You can post a screen shot of the emails of course but that does not confirm the author.

  8. #38
    jlockest is offline Expert Twelever Sapphire jlockest is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,667

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trax View Post
    john - do you believe the solution offered from duncans email account is valid?
    Trax,
    As I said before, I didn't click at first that the solution wasn't the key - hence, when that thought crossed my mind, I asked D if they were in fact separate (from the 22nd):
    I take it that it is now safe to assume that the solution is/was separate to the 'key' (the answer)? But if that is the case, how on earth does having the 'solution' (as laid out in the PDFs) prove that you've also found the 'key'(answer)? That bit really loses me at the moment.


    D then replied (again on 22nd):
    Now, I haven’t ignored the full depth of your question, which is relevant to all the clues and all the lines of text in the puzzle, and to what they refer. As the PDF’s state, and as I have gone into more depth at the beginning of this message. The PDF’s are only THE FINAL STAGES OF THE SOLUTION. This statement would point out that there are stages before this stage. The stages prior to this go into greater depth of the Key its history, its validity and how it is encoded. I state again that once you have found the Key you will discover how submit a correct answer. This does not say ‘once you have found how to submit a correct answer you will discover the Key’. We have offered confirmation, beyond reasonable doubt of how to submit a claim to have won the financial reward of the competition. We stated at the beginning and during the competition that there was so much to this publication, that even after it was solved it would be proved of worth. What we have offered is the very last step, we haven’t revealed all the other steps and layers that would have guided you there.




    So the solution - 'the correct answer' is valid in as much as it is what PPubs are saying they would have taken as the answer. How can I argue against that as a statement? The only bit I can argue against, is the validity/process of finding that solution. It also raised doubts in my mind (see above) that by simply finding the solution and winning the 'prize' you may have completely missed the the 'key'. Maybe that was intentional - ie the solution being so obscure and tenuous, that you couldn't (in all reality) have found it with having found the 'key'. But again that is just conjecture based on D's statement above.

    As I said to D, at first glance, to me the solution was obvious, if you already knew the solution.

    So Trax, even though D says that is the solution, it doesn't mean I have to 'like' it - and that is why I was trying to see if, even with what the PDFs said, I could have made the links as suggested. I stumbled at Rosslyn and the Tree of Life - not because there aren't references to that that I could find, simply because the refeernces (IMHO) seemed to be circular. IE I had to know the Tree and the 'node' meanings, and to know the meaning of the pillars at Rosslyn in a Kabbalah sense to equate them. IE I had to be looking for one in the other - one didn't lead to the other as you may expect in a puzzle.

    So my thoughts at this stage, is that the solution has been shown , and exactly as D says, the workings that lead to that final stage (and the key) haven't.

    I personally don't think anyone would have got the solution without the other 'unreleased' workings for the 'key'. (Stupid statement really, as time showed they didn't).

  9. #39
    Trax's Avatar
    Trax is offline Good Twelever Platinum Trax is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    652

    Default

    I have concerns that similar submissions were offered that would more than have addressed the "needs" to win.

    its very lose.


    Btw - re my first quote...

    Pope Leo X (1513-1521) is a quote tossed around like a hacky-sack, but it cannot be substantiated in the least! Most research finds this quote, or a variation of it, attributed to a Carmelite who converted to protestantism named John Bale (1495-1563), a playwrite, who swore to inflict as much damage upon the Roman church as possible, and in so doing, placed this quote in the mouth of Leo X in his own writings, as represented in 'The Pageant Of The Popes,' pages 179-180 of Vol. 2 (an 1835 reprint in 2 volumes) which was a satirical piece believed to be one of many Bale productions to defame Leo X.

    John you are clouding the issue - the solution to lrb was to find the key - not the grail - but something that would enable the next stage.

    The proposed solution does not reveal the key nor vice versa I agree. In fact its so lacking in substance it would be better if not offered at all. In fairness to the real seekers it is a the core disrespectful and flippant. But worse still - to disseminate it through a fringe forum second hand.... Now most claim duncan is very cordial ( I did receive an email once from him regarding the parchment of clues. He seemed almost bubbly in his reply - clearly keen to have the project succeed for all players) - surely this recent callousness doesnt bear his mark??


    If it is him he is a changed man... Perhaps broken and bitter?

    But PP still continues to operate for now so maybe there is hope.

  10. #40
    jlockest is offline Expert Twelever Sapphire jlockest is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,667

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trax View Post
    I have concerns that similar submissions were offered that would more than have addressed the "needs" to win.

    its very lose.


    Btw - re my first quote...

    Pope Leo X (1513-1521) is a quote tossed around like a hacky-sack, but it cannot be substantiated in the least! Most research finds this quote, or a variation of it, attributed to a Carmelite who converted to protestantism named John Bale (1495-1563), a playwrite, who swore to inflict as much damage upon the Roman church as possible, and in so doing, placed this quote in the mouth of Leo X in his own writings, as represented in 'The Pageant Of The Popes,' pages 179-180 of Vol. 2 (an 1835 reprint in 2 volumes) which was a satirical piece believed to be one of many Bale productions to defame Leo X.

    John you are clouding the issue - the solution to lrb was to find the key - not the grail - but something that would enable the next stage.

    The proposed solution does not reveal the key nor vice versa I agree. In fact its so lacking in substance it would be better if not offered at all. In fairness to the real seekers it is a the core disrespectful and flippant. But worse still - to disseminate it through a fringe forum second hand.... Now most claim duncan is very cordial ( I did receive an email once from him regarding the parchment of clues. He seemed almost bubbly in his reply - clearly keen to have the project succeed for all players) - surely this recent callousness doesnt bear his mark??


    If it is him he is a changed man... Perhaps broken and bitter?

    But PP still continues to operate for now so maybe there is hope.
    Trax,
    What? How am I clouding the issue? I have simply repeated what D said - ie the solution in the PDFs isn't the key. Like that or not.

    As for D being callous - let me put it this way - and again I'm just quoting D - he is/was under no obligation to post anything. The company could have just folded with nothing being said at all. That would have been callous.
    He has given what PPubs would have accepted as the solution to show there was one (he doesn't state that I don't think - those are my words) - I would assume to show that he still worrking in good faith. He has said that he can't release the final PDF until the liquidation process is finished.

    From the release that D initially put out:
    We have released ‘Final Stages of the Solution’ PDF to confirm that to this date we have received no ‘Successful’ entry, after ‘Liquidation’ is complete, a full PDF Solution should be made available.


    He then said in the correspondence:
    As the PDF says, a full solution and depth of the puzzle will come later. At the moment it could be deemed an 'Asset' of the business, so can't do much until the legal review has finished.


    and again:
    These are questions I am not qualified yet to answer. As a Director, it is my legal responsibility to ensure all 'possible' assets are protected. If I, or any Director violates this, it is a criminal process. As we deal mostly in intectual property, it is not as clear liquidation as most closure of trade. As such we could be liable for post-debts, as we had a competition running at point of closure.

    We obviously have contracts and debts owed to us, all this has to be legally assessed independently. Hence us having to hold on to anything that could be listed as an intectual asset.This isn't just the full solution of the puzzle, but also other books set for publication, poetry books, childrens books etc.


    and again:
    As a Director of a Business in the UK, I have legal responsibilities to fulfil by Law. Responsibilities that I may not wish to do, but I have to do to remain legal, under the restrictions of when a Company is moved into Liquidation. As our company works with ‘Intellectual Property’, this is considered an asset, and I am under Law to protect that asset until an independent legal authority deems it either property owned by the company or any individual. That is why, until we have completed that process, we have been STRONGLY advised on what can be released and what can’t.


    ..... etc (there are more)
    Do you want me to continue? How many times did he have to say it?

    How on earth is he being callous?

    I go back to it - my concern here is that as an asset that 'final pdf' is then sellable. I don't care about PPubs finances - you may or may not - I care about that final answer and I tego etc. AND I care about what D must be going through after G_d knows how many years of working on this project.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts