Where can we read your article in that book redietz?
Where can we read your article in that book redietz?
I googled the title and came up blank; link?
Whether or not Google has it depends on when it was published. Redietz when was this published?Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
MrV you will not find my articles in Barron's, New York Magazine, The Columbia Journalism Review in Google either. They go back to the 1970s.
I looked it up a long time ago. I think it was 1984 but I really can't be certain that I remember correctly. I didn't keep anything.
n
In HS a bunch of students wrote poems and short stories, and sent them to a printer & binder.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
They called it our school's "Literary Magazine".
The HS library has a copy for each year it was "published", as do each of the contributors.
Getting a bunch of term papers bound does not count as being published...unless your a ditz who needs it to count for something.
I had trouble reading the pages that were posted. I didn't see any reference to Mr Dietz but the photos weren't very clear. The font appeared to be from a typewriter.
If the book is a compilation of statements given at a conference that would not qualify as being published.
What would qualify is a publication with an editor or editorial board that selects articles to be included such as what is done at Readers Digest or Vanity Fair.
A lot of academics are going to be very sorry. It turns out they haven't really published, according to Mr. Mendelson. I think, since these volumes are available to the public and to libraries (for a hefty price), they fulfill the definition of "published." I just looked at all kinds of definitions of "published," and there are no mentions of Mr. Mendelson's restrictions. Calling the published proceedings a "compilation of statements" is interesting. All published works are, of course, "compilations of statements." This forum, the Bible, and a business logistics textbook are all "compilations of statements."Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
What the proceedings are is an edited published version of the academic papers presented for the sixth conference.
By the way, if people are googling it, Stanford put the proceedings of the fifth conference online for students, but not for public access. I'm not sure anyone put the sixth online. It was in the UNLV library, last I checked.
Have no fear, though. If Mr. Mendelson says I need to post something different, I'll get right to it.
Note: I was hoping Mr. Mendelson or Boss Belly would say something like this, of course. Mr. Mendelson had a copy of this paper sent to his phone at the same time that "the package" was sent to him. He said that he had left his phone at the office or something like that (for months?) and was unable to read it.
Anyone can call themselves a writer. Anyone with a blog can say they're published.
I have certain standards.
You gotta be kidding me. Go to the UNLV library. This stuff isn't free to the public. They charge universities a small fortune.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
I understand that your standards are quite high and don't fit the usual definitions of "published."Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Note: I really need to apply to The Onion. I'm getting a knack for this.
Left my phone at the office? Can't you come up with better bullshit?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzA lot of academics are going to be very sorry. It turns out they haven't really published, according to Mr. Mendelson. I think, since these volumes are available to the public and to libraries (for a hefty price), they fulfill the definition of "published." I just looked at all kinds of definitions of "published," and there are no mentions of Mr. Mendelson's restrictions. Calling the published proceedings a "compilation of statements" is interesting. All published works are, of course, "compilations of statements." This forum, the Bible, and a business logistics textbook are all "compilations of statements."Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
What the proceedings are is an edited published version of the academic papers presented for the sixth conference.
By the way, if people are googling it, Stanford put the proceedings of the fifth conference online for students, but not for public access. I'm not sure anyone put the sixth online. It was in the UNLV library, last I checked.
Have no fear, though. If Mr. Mendelson says I need to post something different, I'll get right to it.
Note: I was hoping Mr. Mendelson or Boss Belly would say something like this, of course. Mr. Mendelson had a copy of this paper sent to his phone at the same time that "the package" was sent to him. He said that he had left his phone at the office or something like that (for months?) and was unable to read it.
Just post it here, now, so it's readable and quit whining.
I don't get you and Rob, Alan. These guys play everyone like a fiddle,with nonsense. They're not worth responding to.
I guess I'm used to dealing with honest people. Even politicians. LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by slingshot
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonI guess I'm used to dealing with honest people. Even politicians. LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by slingshot
I have an email, dated July 27th, from Mr. Mendelson saying he got the pics of the conference article. But then afterwards, he refused to pick up the package and wouldn't even verify that I wrote the article sent to him. Said it had something to do with his phone and email.
I think what I said was that my phone's software could not open your attachment.
So here's your chance Mr Dietz to post a legible copy on this forum for all to see. Just do it.
By the way you said other copies of your package were available. Who did you send them to? Who even said they wanted to read it?
Dan didn't want your package. He told me why, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Sounds reasonable. You said, "Got it." Then didn't mention that your phone couldn't open it. Great story.
I didn't send Dan anything. I wasn't in promotional mode. I was just trying to demonstrate that I was me because Argentino was claiming I wasn't. Remember that? He kept saying that redietz on this site wasn't the R.E.Dietz who won the Wise Guys and was in the Playbook and House of Sports newsletters. I just wanted an identity verification from a reputed journalist, namely you.
The only person other than yourself who requested one was the CFO of a pharmaceutical firm. He retired last year. We'll be doing some stuff.
Tony opened your package and told me what was in it. I never doubted you. All this drama for nothing. Absolutely nothing.
You say Singer has no credibility? Then why do you even bother reacting to what he says?
Drama.
couldnt a low level yearly "winner" at any gambling offset his winnings with losses. For example...a sports bettor, in addition to his tickets that he posses as losses...couldnt he accumulate tickets that get discarded at sports books or race tracks, and then also claim losses at blackjack tables or craps tables.
You can always offset wins with losses with or without documentation. But it's better to have documentation.