Nearing Completion of Evaluation of RS system (not)

There's no need to make this about proving Singer wrong. I think it's useful for people to know I don't post for financial gain...and Singer is being perfectly reasonable to think this might be a plausible explanation based on imperfect information. I happen to know how many books I've sold since I began posting on LVA, he doesn't have this information. Now he will. I would actually be surprised if this didn't change his opinion on at least this one small point. He's not stupid he just jumps to conclusions with partial information. It's actually a sign of creativity and dot connecting. The problem is that many very creative people are also more prone to this type of cognition error. In that book I read, "The Believing Brain" it links this type of situation to reduced functioning in the ACC (Anterior Cingulate Cortex) which acts as a type of error detection. Highly creative people were found to have low functioning in the ACC and be more prone to magical thinking. Basically the same process that gives a person a lot of ideas makes it less likely for all those ideas to be correct. It's a good read.

Yes there is Frank. Or were you planning to open that thread anyhow (even if Singer hadn't made that comment)? Let's call a spade a spade.

Singer's honoust opinion won't change because you could have simply told him the amount of books you sold through LVA and he would have believed you immediately right? Now the best thing that can happen is him saying: "Ok Frank, you're not just contributing to boost your sales, but Dancer is". What's the difference? Please don't fool yourself.....

I have a bad feeling about this 'evaluation'. Like so many Singer challenges that Singer himself has been involved in concerning his system, it seems destined to fizzle out after 30 or 40 pages of posts.

I enjoy posting about scientific discoveries that I've read about, and I like sharing my experience as a pro if it helps people. I do not enjoy saying negative things about anyone. Where Singer has made direct comments as to my motives for certain behaviors, I'll offer the alternative argument if I disagree with his conclusions. Nothing more. He and I get along and I've come to understand him quite well.

In the presence of understanding malice is hard to achieve.

Frank, my comments are not about creating controverse between you and Singer. Singer will, in time, be perfectly capable to create that by himself. It's just a matter of time because a person can only take so much........The only thing I'm saying is, you don't need to prove anything. Especially not because Singer is saying so....... and that's exactly what you're doing by opening that new thread.

He and you get along.....but the effort that's put into that is mainly yours. I respond to what I see and read. Singer doesn't seem to put much effort into getting along......but if that's fine by you, it's fine by me

I noticed my other thread has gotten zero replies from people that bought my book from hearing about it at LVA. Gosh I expected a number less than 10. I did not expect a number less than 1.

It has long been my assumption that the forum community are not avid book readers as they do one instead of, not as well as the other.

~FK

Forum reading, and writing, has put in crimp in my other reading this trip. Normally by now I'd be wrapping up my second instead of my first book. But tonight I've started a new book, my first non-work-related non-fiction in a couple of years. By the look of the introductory material it looks like it will be a good read, especially the fourth of the three categories.

Can you share what the book is that you are reading? Work related books don't count.

There are three counting the one that doesn't count:
Dean Koontz, Mr Murder (fiction)
Dave Hendrickson, 12 Essential Skills for Software Architects (non-fiction, work related)
Frank Kneeland, The Secret World of Video Poker Progressives (non-fiction, not work related)

The last one is the one I just got and started today. It looks to be an interesting read. I'll report back as I progressive through it.

Kaypea think of it this way: the $200 you pocketed on your first trip gave you the $200 bankroll for your second trip. If you wanted to keep playing on your first trip you should have a bigger bankroll. But is gambling all you do when you go to Vegas? If so there is no need to stay there after your initial bankroll is lost.