Printable View
Several of you called Tony about the package. Now you know I haven't been to the office in months.
I asked Tony to open the package. I thought it was okay since there are no secrets.
Tony says it contains 50-70 pages of articles by Robert Dietz and what appear to be contest results with Dietz listed.
The package is still there waiting for me.
I've got more than 400 PAGES of articles by me that were actually published. 50-70 pages? Big whoop! And anywhere within these pages, does the author prove his identity in any way, shape or form?
This is red's typical way of bsing his way around everything he's asked about himself. Here he's providing info but no support of it actually being him. And doesn't it seem interesting that there are supposed "contest results" (whatever that means) but nowhere to look them up on the internet?
Pure BS, from start to finish. And who would actually bother Tony with this nonsense anyway?
As I wrote in another thread, why Rob can't you accept that "our" redietz is who he says he is?
You're being ridiculous and sometimes you pick the wrong battles.
The package was sent. It contains articles written by Robert Dietz and he's listed as winning various sports betting contests.
Are we finished now?
Tony wants to charge me for storage. LOL
And this is exactly what was expected. These clowns (I am substituting clown for troll) make challenges and then refuse to accept the proof. This is precisely why nobody, AP or other should humor these buffoons, or even acknowledge them. They read and see what they want to see....not what is reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...489C&FORM=VIRE
KewlJ, it's okay. Half the material I sent is primarily from third party sources that vetted me and evaluated what I was doing and made it public. Alan requested I not inundate him with a boatload of stuff, so I didn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJAnd this is exactly what was expected. These clowns (I am substituting clown for troll) make challenges and then refuse to accept the proof. This is precisely why nobody, AP or other should humor these buffoons, or even acknowledge them. They read and see what they want to see....not what is reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...489C&FORM=VIRE
I don't think Rob quite gets the idea that volume of pages not vetted by anyone isn't real impressive. My mother-in-law worked as a (paid) stringer for small papers and was paid by the column inch , so maybe Rob should have been shooting for that, as it would have been a step up.
Alan, could you verify that you requested I not send a boatload of stuff? Thanks in advance. If I remember the exchange correctly, I actually sent a bit more than Alan would have preferred. God, I mean, I have a book outline somewhere that the Allen and Yarnow Literary Agency requested. If I was padding stuff up, I would have included that.
Because it's the INTERNET Alan--loaded with anonymous personalities and others who want credit for the efforts of others. And since when are most claims--esp. in the gambling world--truthful? Just look at the BS kew threw around, and how he and his fellow bsers are now paying the price for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Have him prove that he's this Robert Dietz, and THEN we'll be finished.
Okay, we're back where we started. I'm the Robert Dietz from an alternate universe.
Rob, you're getting long in the tooth, my friend. The package contains the very first interview anyone did with me, which I think would be tough to locate. It also contains a rather heavy-handed and badly written critique of mine that criticized a sports analysis done by Carl Sagan (yes, that Carl Sagan). The journal editors thought it convincing enough to publish it, even though I pretty much butchered the writing. But I don't think anybody knows about that one except me, so I'm afraid your alternative universe Robert Dietz theory is shot.
Keep trying though. I will recommend something Hunter S. Thompson said at a commencement address, "I hate to recommend drugs and alcohol for everyone, but they've worked for me." I'm hoping they'll work for you, too, Rob.
Oh, and we're not done. I mean, this package has gotten so much pre-scrutiny, I gotta think people want to know what's in there. If Alan doesn't give it a proper review, I guess I'll ship it along to Dan so he can have a peek.
KJ, mickey, you guys wouldn't mind knowing what's in there, would you?
Quit responding to Rob Stringer. Nothing good can come of it.
Is there any reason he can't just send it to you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Tony has other things to do and I wasn't going to bother him. Besides that, how many days do you think he's in the office?
But he didnt have better things to do when he opened and looked at it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I dont even know who the hell Tony is, therefore, I don't think about how often he's in the "office" (AKA the P.O. box.).
Pointless to continue. Redietz could have posted it all himself. I still want to know why he didn't? To set me up? Most likely.
Ok, so I have decided to document our little story of redietz's package. The story begins on July 23, 2017 when Alan requests that redietz mail the package to his office.
The package arrives of July 27, 2017. He promises to pick it up the following week.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
When the following week comes and goes, Alan states that he goes to the office one day a weekQuote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
August 7, 11 days, Alan has not been to the office (as promised) to receive the package and report back to us.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
August 13, now 17 days after the package arrives, Alan continues to drag his feet..Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
August 20, now 24 days and the guy who goes into the office one day a week continues his stone-walling..Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
August 31, now 5 full weeks and Alan continues to drag his feet and now begins to change his story from "goes into the office one day a week" to "once or twice a month". But even his revised story is in shambles as it has now been 5 full weeks! His excuses can't change fast enough to keep up with reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Still August 31, he now claims he made no promises about the package. Why did he request it then?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
September 2, 37 days!
One day later on September 3, 38 days since receiving the package, he begins to alter his story yet again, telling us he doesn't have to go into the office.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
September 5, His story evolves yet again to "from time to time he stops by".Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
September 7, 42 days or 6 full weeks since receiving the package, more delay tactics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
And now his story changes yet again, from "visits the office one day a week" to "once or twice a month" and now to "maybe once a quarter!"Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
September 10, 45 days after receiving the package, and Alan can't predict when he might get to the office. He has the urge to see redietz's proof, but sadly Alan doesn't even have the key to his own office.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
And finally, September 12, 47 days after receiving the package....that he requested, Alan informs us that he is not responsible for any of this bullshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
There it is folks! That is Alan Mendelson, your honest (<- HA!) journalist, in all his integrity, just anxious to investigate for our behalf. I'll let you all draw your on conclusions, but for me....let's see...what's the word I am looking for? ......oh yeah.... SHYSTER!Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
That was unkind and untrue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I already stated that the majority of the material does not feature headlines with my name, credits with my name, and would not fall under the aegis of scholarly material (some of it would). Therefore most of the material should not be posted without clearing it with the original copyright holders. The easy (and legally safe) way of verifying me was simply to have a reputable journalist look at it, evaluate, and report.
Seemed simple enough.
More senseless posturing redietz. This stuff and your refusal to post it online, your refusal to positively identify if you are or are not the person receiving the so-called accolades, and your continued long-winded, wordy posts, CLEARLY show some kind of deception going on. And on top of that, you've gotten our resident twinkle toes all flustered and beside himself over your involving Alan in all this nonsense.
Fess up....and get this done yourself. Properly.
Fixed.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Allow me to say what's unkind and untrue.
1. I told redietz I didn't need to see his articles because I believed him.
2. I told redietz to post the documents himself and for some reason he refused. But... he wanted me to? As if I'm supposed to justify the claims of redietz?
3. I don't have a set schedule for being in the office.
4. I took time off and traveled. Its not like I went to the office and ignored the package. For weeks I never went near the office.
In summary all of you can go to hell. I'm not your servant or your employee and I'm not errand boy.
And for my buddy kewlj the casinos were five minutes from my girlfriend's house in Vegas... but the office was five and a half hours from my girlfriend's house and even when I was back in LA it was at least a one hour round trip IF Tony was there.
Just drop it.
Redietz post your photos.
No, you have 400 pages of toilet paper.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
This is bullshit. You could have photographed anything with your name on it. And if it doesn't have your name on it what does it prove?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzThat was unkind and untrue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I already stated that the majority of the material does not feature headlines with my name, credits with my name, and would not fall under the aegis of scholarly material (some of it would). Therefore most of the material should not be posted without clearing it with the original copyright holders. The easy (and legally safe) way of verifying me was simply to have a reputable journalist look at it, evaluate, and report.
Seemed simple enough.
To everyone on the forum: This is the private message that I sent to redietz that he did not tell you about. I sent it to him on July 23rd, almost two months ago:
Recipient Users: redietz
07-23-2017,*11:17 PM
Do me a favor. Use your cell phone camera to send me a couple of pictures. Don't send me a bunch of stuff. This is ridiculous. Don;t bother with Singer's crap.
I never wanted his package, but he insisted. In fact (and I can copy and post his private message to me if necessary) he said he was making copies for other people and wanted to include me in the mailing. Do I have to post that redietz?
He insisted, so I gave him the office address. All along he could have posted the info himself on this forum. He raised the copyright issues before and I told him that under "fair use" he could post the photos, especially photos that include his name. And as I posted previously, if his name were not included in the content why would he post it anyway?
Yes redietz, I think you wanted to set me up or he wanted to use me.
And again I never challenged you. Now I say this: find someone else. You lost me.