Proving the Troll Mark Conrad Wrong yet again with another one of his famous lies

Discussion in 'Windows Vista General Discussion' started by andy t, Mar 5, 2010.

  1. andy t

    andy t Guest


    The reason he is so obsessing about me is quite simple really. It's because
    I caught him red-handed, lying and cheating on the WWW in his own words and
    context and in black and white for everybody else to see.


    He just does not like the fact that he was caught out as the lying cheating
    fraudulent Troll that he is. So now he is desperately trying to backpedal
    from that fact.


    Everybody now, knows they cannot believe a single word he says especially
    about his dictation sample tests which he posts and then claims 100%
    accuracy. Because he got caught cheating, we all now know he simply copies
    and pastes them in the hope that you will believe he actually dictated them.
    How sad can you get.


    Here is my response to one of his posts in here just so that you know the
    reasons and to put the truth to the subject instead of his incessant lies.


    The reason it's difficult for you to keep up with is because they are not
    lies and you tell so many of them. They are all true and I've proved them
    all on the WWW for everybody to see!



    (We shall see ;-)



    I don't know what dictionary you were looking in. Was it your toy made up
    one?

    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Homophone


    The link below shows a list of *ALL* British English homophones. 'Tutu' is
    not there!

    Look under number 392. 'TUTU' IS NOT A HOMOPHONE OF 'TO', 'TOO' OR 'TWO'.
    You said it was!

    http://www.ask.com/bar?q=List+of+Al...1y7DPpLrfhIUduxlTah3RTwrF8=&tsp=1267794972073



    It does not matter how you try to spin it and backpedal from what your
    original statement was. 'Tutu' IS NOT a homophone or homonym of 'to' 'too'
    or 'two'. YOU SAID IT WAS.



    Ah, changing the goalposts yet again. Yes, when spoken like that (each
    selection has two syllables NOT ONE) so the sounding is the same. That still
    doesn't make 'tutu' a homophone of 'to', 'too' or 'two'.


    However, that is not what you stated anyway. I STILL maintain 'TUTU' IS NOT
    A HOMOPHONE OF 'TO', 'TOO' OR 'TWO'. YOU SAID IT WAS in your original
    statement. Just as you said in an earlier post that 'TUTU' IS A HOMONYM OF
    'TO', 'TOO' OR 'TWO'. Now let's see him squirm and wriggle and backpedal his
    way out of that.


    Read below. An explanation grammar guide that 'to too' should not be
    confused with 'tutu'. She mentions that 'to' and 'too' are homophones and
    that 'to too' is not a short form of 'tutu'.

    http://www.graphicaldatablog.com/?p=221


    You are more slippery than a barrel full of eels! Gheeze! Did you ever go to
    school?


    This is a classic case of his constant backpedalling. The poor old sod is
    backpedalling for his life to try and change what he really said. His
    dementia has kicked him once more. He forgets everything he puts down and
    posts here into this news group directly after he had posted them. That's
    how bad his dementia is.


    Fortunately, the posts are kept as records in these news groups. So let's
    start off with this post that Troll Conrad posted. You can easily find it by
    typing into the search bar in newsgroups, the heading of the title thread
    that he started which is below.


    "Question for Windows Speech Recognition guru"


    Here is an excerpt from it in his OWN WORDS and CONTEXT





    So firstly, he was calling them homonyms, which they certainly are not.


    Below is an excerpt from another poster (an English major) correcting him
    because the daft old bugger is as thick as a plank!


    As I say, you can check it all out in the whole thread with the title above.
    Troll Conrad tries to backpedal and claw his way out of it as he usually
    does after realising what a peach of a statement he has made in saying that
    'tutu' is a homonym of 'to', 'too' and 'two'. ;-)


    Come on Troll Conrad! Now come back and say you didn't post that even WITH
    the PROOF that you did. let's see him try to wriggle out of this one. ;-)


    The poster even states he expects WSR could pick up the difference between
    to, too, and two when each is used in context. And he is right, it does.
    Another thing Troll Conrad refutes.


    So originally he thought they were homonyms. When he was quickly corrected
    by myself and the other poster above, he has since done some serious
    backpedalling because now it's calling them homophones. He changes his mind
    like the weather. So now let's come to the homophone.


    Surely, someone in this news group can come in and confirm that 'tutu' IS
    NOT a homophone OR homonym of 'to' 'too' or 'two'?


    We shall see who has egg on their face. Just as you did when you failed the
    typing/dictation speed test and had to resort to cheating because of his
    failure.


    What are homophones?


    Homophones are words that sound the same, but have different spellings and
    meanings, e.g.flower and flour. Read below and that will tell you EXACTLY
    what a homophone is.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/skillswise/words/spelling/recognising/homophones/factsheet1.shtml


    Now that you have backpedalled from what you originally stated by calling
    'tutu' a homonym of 'to', 'too' or two' (which it is not). Now let's
    establish what the difference is between a homonym and a homophone.


    For today's lesson for Troll Conrad.

    Homonym

    One of two or more words have the same sound and often the same spelling but
    differ in meaning, such as bank (embankment) and bank (place where money is
    kept).


    Homophone

    One of two or more words, such as night and knight, that are pronounced the
    same but differ in meaning, origin, and sometimes spelling.


    Source: Dictionary.com


    I do not need to backpedal. Read below. The RIGHT FACTS on the difference
    between a homonym and a homophone.
    http://www.taupecat.com/personal/homophones/


    After realising what a prize Prat you made yourself look with the statement
    above about a homonym, you then changed it to this: 'tutu' is a homophone of
    'to', 'too' or 'two' WHICH IT IS NOT. Tutu is two syllables whereas to, too
    or two (separate words) are only one and therefore DO NOT SOUND ALIKE.


    Below is the English homophone dictionary.
    http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/writing/homofone.htm#t


    Show me ANYWHERE in the, homophone dictionary where 'tutu' is a homophone of
    'to', 'too' or 'two'. You won't find it because it isn't!


    Learn the difference between the three homophones 'to', 'too' and 'two'.
    Nowhere does it mention or link tutu in with those three homophones.

    http://www.quia.com/pop/31282.html

    A homophone triplet 'to', 'too' 'two' (not tutu).

    http://www.jimwegryn.com/Words/Homophones.htm

    This factsheet is BBC Copyright. A FACT sheet on homophones.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/skillswise/words/spelling/recognising/homophones/factsheet.shtml

    Wiki

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophone

    Definition list of to, too and two.

    http://www.enchantedlearning.com/dictionary/wordentry/threewords/to/

    Words about Words

    http://www.startwright.com/words1.htm

    http://www.emints.org/ethemes/resources/S00001152.shtml

    http://www.bifroest.demon.co.uk/misc/homophones.html



    Look above the Dick head. I use a proper dictionary. Not the Troll Conrad
    made up version.


    More made up nonsense. Should have spent more time in school instead of
    lying and cheating.

    Read all the above links an explanation on homophones and homonyms then you
    may learn something.


    'Tu-tu' has two syllables. 'To, 'too' and 'two', all have one. Therefore,
    the latter, their sounding when pronounced are DIFFERENT to the former. So
    once again, tutu is not a homophone or homonym of to, too, and two. FACT!


    That's because you know they are true and you cannot refute them.


    You wish they were lies but since you have been caught out RED-HANDED on the
    WWW for lying and cheating, you are now desperately trying to squirm and
    wriggle out of them. I will make it easier for you and list them out for
    you and everybody else to see, which they can check out easily by looking
    back on your own posts.


    1. I dictated the test document in the typing/dictation speed test. (He
    actually copied and pasted it several times over)

    2. It is conceivable that Dragon would be able to interpret somebody
    properly, speaking at 600 wpm.

    3. It is conceivable that Dragon would be able to interpret somebody
    properly, speaking at 600 wpm AND be a 100% accurate.

    4. I can dictate 836 wpm

    5. I can dictate 836 wpm with 100% accuracy

    6. I reckon I could dictate 320 wpm

    7. I reckon I could dictate 320 wpm with 100% accuracy using Dragon

    8. I can dictate 307.2 wpm

    9. I can dictate 307.2 wpm with 100% accuracy using Dragon

    10. I can dictate 260 wpm

    11. I can dictate 260 wpm with 100% accuracy using Dragon

    12. I can dictate 200 wpm

    13. I can dictate 200 wpm with 100% accuracy using Dragon

    14. I can dictate 150 wpm with 100% accuracy every time using Dragon.

    15. I do not copy and paste my sample test documents that I put in this
    newsgroup for all the WWW to see.

    16. A typist speed test cannot be compared or measured to dictation speed in
    wpm.

    17. I know how the WSR toolkit would perform when used in conjunction with
    WSR, even though I do not own a copy of the software.

    18. The WSR toolkit has to have a reviewer in it to enhance accuracy. All of
    the other features within it will not perform this function.

    19. WSR is crap.

    20. I am not a liar.

    21. I am not a cheat.

    22. I am not a bullshitter.

    23. I am not a fraudulent troll

    24. I am an expert in the field of speech recognition.

    25. I know what a homonym is.

    26. I know what a homophone is.

    27. Spelling correctly is not important.

    28. I am not a salesman promoting Dragon in this news group

    29. I was only trying to ridicule Andy regarding the 836 wpm speed dictation
    test scenario

    30. I do not make up my own rules regarding speech dictation speed and
    accuracy.

    31. I do not backpedal.



    Another smokescreen and desperate bid to try and hide the fact he is.


    I do not need to demonise you because you are doing a fine job of that
    yourself tying yourself up in knots. The only thing I do is correct your
    lies, deceit, cheating and fraudulency.


    Well you keep posting that the WSR toolkit does not work when you have never
    used it in the first place. You have been told that the reviewer in the base
    of WSR does not work. I just assume that you are still using it, seeing as
    you do not have the WSR toolkit and therefore you are pissing in the wind
    and guessing about the capabilities of it.


    Is that the best you can do? Okay I take that one back but what about the
    other 31 lies?



    Seems I have really hit a nerve. You see this is what happens when you get
    caught red-handed on the WWW as a lying and cheating fraudulent Troll and so
    has to resort to throwing out statements as the above to try and backpedal
    and dig their way out of it.


    Oh dear! I believe I have really hit a nerve. As a qualified psychologist
    would say; this is a classic case of guilt! ;-)


    They are not lies you sad that little old man because they are there in
    black and white on the WWW in your words and your context for everybody to
    see. In my previous posts, I even given the title of the threads that you
    start where this lying and cheating is. It's just that you forget you posted
    them because of that dementia of yours.


    You wouldn't know a fact if it smacked you in the face. The true facts are
    there in black and white and you're backpedalling above is futile when the
    SHEER AMOUNT OF PROOF is on the WWW in your OWN words and context for
    everybody to see with their own eyes.



    Further proof that he is a salesman of Nuance because he has been promoting
    MacSpeech AS WELL as Dragon. Because he knew FULL WELL that MacSpeech would
    be bought up by Dragon.



    Funny that, because I like to use the following words next to each other in
    WSR such as hepaticocholangiocholecystenterostomies annulopapillary
    supercalifragilisticexpialidocious just to prove Troll Conrad wrong and that
    you do not need a reviewer to put words into the WSR vocabulary in less than
    no time at all and they will stay there. I can use them anywhere and any
    time I want.


    He spent $1600 on Dragon Medical so he could put medical words like that to
    the screen when I did in WSR in no time at all. And it's free within a whole
    operating system LOL!


    Tsk tsk. "poo-poos"- (noun) excrement - or an act of defecating.


    I believe you meant pooh-poohs. Even Dragon Pro knows how to spell it
    properly.

    "poo-poos"- Oh the irony ;-)


    Now, we all know that is untrue. One of his many lies because as we have
    since found out, all he does is copy and paste a set of text and then post
    it in this news group. And as for 100% accuracy, he is having a laugh.


    He is the fastest copy and paste expert in the West.


    We all know that Troll Conrad could only cheat using the typing/dictation
    speed test which he failed miserably. All he could do was copy and paste the
    test, text document. It is all in his posts for everybody to see. He was
    caught out hook, line and sinker.



    Further evidence above that he is a Nuance salesman and confirming what I
    have been saying all along about this Troll trying to discredit a perfectly
    good product.


    Even further evidence that Troll Conrad is a Nuance salesman talking about a
    broken feature he already knows does not work. He also knows that by
    acquiring the WSR toolkit, this solves all the problems he is blabbing on
    about. That is why I can produce all these ridiculously long medical words
    by training it in WSR as shown above.


    Now if he would only stop living in denial and go back and take a look at
    all his previous posts. These prove he is a lying cheating fraudulent Troll
    who has just forgotten what he has actually posted because of his dementia.


    To end with, this is for you Troll Conrad, a few lessons for you to learn
    the TRUE MEANING of a homophone.


    Here is a list of common homophones.

    Homophones Examples

    Allowed - aloud

    You are not allowed to smoke until you are 16.
    She spoke her thoughts aloud (to say something so it can be heard).

    Bear - bare

    A bear is a large furry animal.
    She walked on the beach with bare feet.

    Bored - board

    To be bored is to have lost interest in something.
    A board is a flat piece of wood.

    Break - brake

    If you break something you damage it.
    When you brake the car slows down.


    Caught - court

    He caught a large fish.
    You play tennis on a tennis court.


    Find - fined

    I can't find my socks.
    She was fined £40 for driving too fast on the motorway.


    pour - poor - paw

    Can you please pour some milk on my cereal.
    He grew up in a poor neighbourhood.
    The cat hurt his paw in a fight.

    To - too - two (notice there is not any tutu there.) ;-)

    He isn't going to work today.
    Too is another way to say as well.
    Two is the number between one and three.


    And so on and so forth etc etc.

    Another lie you got wrong because you are a lying cheating fraudulent Troll
    and everybody now knows it!

    andy t
     
    andy t, Mar 5, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. andy t

    andy t Guest


    Notice he mentions "to discuss Windows/Vista general topics, and help each
    other".

    So how does mentioning Dragon NaturallySpeaking come into the equation then
    in a Windows/ Vista and general topics forum? More to the point, how is
    Dragon NaturallySpeaking helping anybody in a Windows/Vista general topics
    forum?


    It is completely off topic for this forum and is not constructive for
    anything in Windows at all.

    EVEN WSR itself has its own specialised news group forum in the form of
    microsoft.public speech.desktop but he will not pose his questions in there.
    Do you know why? It is because there is nowhere near the amount of traffic
    in there than there is in here.

    This is how he draws you in as any salesman does and then BANG, out of the
    blue, Dragon NaturallySpeaking pops up.

    So with both those points, it beggars the question on why he does it. I
    will tell you why. So you people will latch on to the fact and have shoved
    down your throats about a product he is promoting in a forum designed to
    help people with Windows problems.

    That is why most of the people in here and I will be soon, ignore this
    troll.

    Do not get me wrong. I use Dragon NaturallySpeaking as well and it is a
    great product but it does not belong here in these news groups. I have
    specialised Websites that I go on that deal exactly with this product and
    you get all the answers you need in them. So once again you must ask
    yourself, why does he not go in them instead?

    I will leave you to draw your own conclusions with that.

    Now he will come back with some bullshit story about Vista speech
    recognition or WSR for short, being a topic within Windows but if you watch,
    in a matter of paragraphs, he will change to the subject in some way,
    metaphor or form to Dragon NaturallySpeaking. A completely independent
    product made by Nuance who are nothing to do with any Windows app
    whatsoever, including Vista speech or WSR for short.


    So I am not here to undermine anything. Just correcting the garbage and
    lies that come from your mouth.


    That sounds interestingly like a backpedal because the truth really hurts
    especially when you are found out.

    Once again, read the above and draw your own conclusions.



    I like cheese on toast but I don't bring it up as a topic in a Microsoft
    Windows news group forum.


    Bingo! There you have it plainly written above that it is simply the best
    available to Vista users. TO VISTA USERS! If that is not advertising a
    completely unrelated product in a Vista news group, then I don't know what
    is!


    I will leave you to draw your own conclusions on that as well.


    < SNIPPED >


    I have snipped the rest because Troll Conrad goes into 33 lines of a tirade
    about the history of Nuance with a couple of references in there just for
    good measure. That's almost a book!

    Off topic or what? Anything to do with Microsoft Windows Vista? Will that
    help anybody in here with any problems?

    I will leave you with the statement that Troll Conrad wrote at the top of
    this post. In his own words. In his own context. And in black-and-white for
    you all to see. Then tell me who is determined to undermine the productive
    upbeat purpose of this news group?


    Now I will leave you to draw your own conclusions with that as well.

    No doubt as a salesman, he will come back in to try and justify the above.
    After all, that's what all salesman do because they have the gift of the gab
    and will spin black to white in their aim to try and sell you their product.
    ;-)

    Do not be fooled for a minute.

    andy t
     
    andy t, Mar 7, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. andy t

    andy t Guest

    "Mark Conrad" The fastest backpedal merchant in the world!




    First things first. Why don't you tell us all how you did it other than
    copying and pasting it? (Let us see If he actually answers this)


    Perfect backpedalling as only a salesman could pitch trying to wriggle out
    of your predicament.


    I have already explained this in my earlier posts so that viewers can easily
    see what bullshit you do come out with. I will explain it again and correct
    your dribble and trying to claw your way out of it.


    I KNOW that the website can be fooled and cheated because I did it as well
    remember by copying and pasting the test, text document in several times
    over until I reached 967 wpm.


    Even if you did not copy and paste. Even if you did something else to cheat
    it. That was not the object of the exercise.


    If you read ALL the posts in the thread, I explained that I took the test
    legitimately. That means, I did not copy and paste, I did not cheat in any
    other way. All I did was dictate legal and honest, the way you are meant to
    dictate by speaking the words, as you will see with my name beside the
    tests.


    Now, you have always professed you can dictate in the 300s wpm with 100%
    accuracy every time on the WWW with your medical jargon in it or not. Now we
    have only got your word for that without ANY PROOF because you CANNOT PROVE
    IT. This is only your word telling us this. So for a start how do we know
    that you are not cheating with that? There is no way of knowing, it is only
    your word, which I for one do not accept.


    So I put before you a test on the WWW where you could prove your claims once
    and for all without the need to just post them on the WWW willy-nilly to say
    you did, which proved nothing.


    Now you obviously tried before hand because the posts directly preceding the
    ones where you actually signed your name to, were only showing 43 wpm. This
    was obviously you beforehand practising using proper dictation. As in
    speaking the words rather than cheating. And then when you found you could
    not do it, all you could do was cheat to cover your tracks and make up some
    bullshit story that the typist website could not give an accurate readout
    and added that you were trying to ridicule me.


    Indeed, you have also since in one of your recent posts I believe, try to
    backpedal and add arguments such as you need to shove papers through
    reviewers or familiarise yourself with the words first which is all bullshit
    backpedalling and your way of trying to wriggle out of the truth. I did not
    do all that and I still managed an average of 150 wpm.


    Now getting back to what I was originally saying. If I can take the test
    LEGITIMATELY by speaking the words LEGITIMATELY so therefore dictating
    LEGITIMATELY with BOTH speech apps. Why could you not do it exactly the same
    way as I did LEGITIMATELY to prove your point. Instead of cheating and
    putting all the bullshit stories you can muster instead to backpedal with
    all your life?


    I will tell you why. Because you cannot dictate that many words that you say
    you can and get 100% accuracy. So why should anybody believe what you say
    again by simply putting text documents on the WWW with lots of intricate
    words in and then saying you dictated them with 100% accuracy?


    Also if you read all the posts in that thread in order, it was only when
    another poster corrected you in that thread, that you then started to
    backpedal realising what a Prat you sounded by saying that. Anybody can see
    this if they read all the posts in that thread in order, not just some of
    them that you care to pick and choose.


    I did not say you could dictate 600 wpm. However, in your post titled:-


    "Speech Recognition (SR) at 600 wpm, possible?"


    YOU DID SAY this.


    Your very own words in context.


    Two lies in one there. Firstly, Dragon would not be able to understand her
    gobbledygook speaking at that speed. Secondly, Dragon would not have any
    accuracy at all because it would not be able to interpret any of the words
    from her gobbledygook.


    I have explained all this in my previous posts. I have put the links down
    for the woman who can speak 600 wpm and explained in great detail why she
    would fail using Dragon. No need to go through all of it again because it is
    all there in black and white with all the proof needed.


    No need to apologise. Look above shit for brains. Check out the whole facts
    in my more detailed post about this.


    Very selectively chosen. When you read in order ALL the posts in that thread
    is quite clearly a backpedal as I have explained above.


    That STILL does not explain why you did not take them test legitimately as I
    did.



    You only posted that after another poster corrected your idiot post
    beforehand as I have explained above. Only AFTER the poster corrected you,
    did you start your backpedalling with your statement above.


    All of this is a smokescreen anyway because at the end of the day, you did
    not dictate a bean and did not take the test properly in the first place to
    prove your claims. And you still haven't.





    Now you claim you never ever did say that you *dictated* the test.
    Fortunately, you have conveniently put the whole post below for me, saving
    me the time to find it again.

    Let's take a look at the appropriate wording in your post.


    Yep. It certainly says "MY DICTATION speed with 100% accuracy" to my eyes.
    Notice the operative word *dictation*. Implying that this was his dictation
    speed and therefore basically, saying he had dictated the test.


    It WAS NOT according to the test site. It was not according to anything
    because you did not take the test legitimately because you could not produce
    the results. So you cheated then simply put "according to Andy's test site
    below" as an obvious smokescreen and backpedal because you could not produce
    your claims the legitimate way. By dictating as I did.


    Gheeze! This Troll should do the backpedal in the Olympics. He would win
    every time!


    "being afraid to run that speed test". You are not supposed to run anything.
    You were supposed to dictate legitimately as I did as I am now.


    Yes, I selected the site. In the hope that you would take the test on that
    site PROPERLY and LEGITIMATELY by actually DICTATING. As I did.



    You lying cheating fraudulent wrinkled up old troll! Sort out your dementia
    because you forget everything you do post as soon as you have put it down.


    LOOK ABOVE DICKHEAD AND GET YOUR BRAIN FIXED!


    And now everybody knows it is not a lie. As I say, I have posted this before
    and anybody can check in my previous posts in great detail to find all your
    bullshit lies Mr. slippery backpedal extraordinaire!


    andy t
     
    andy t, Mar 7, 2010
    #3
  4. andy t

    andy t Guest

    Troll Conrad's Lie




    Yep. It certainly says "MY DICTATION speed with
    100% accuracy" to my eyes. Notice the operative
    word *dictation*. Implying that this was his
    dictation speed and therefore basically,
    saying he had dictated the test.


    Please do read all of the thread in order. You will see him backpedalling
    for all his life.

    You will see he changed his tune and story AFTER he was corrected and found
    out by another independent poster.



    That's just a snippet that troll Conrad plucked from the air in one segment
    of the whole thread. he quickly backpedalled once a poster told him all his
    ridiculous claims. Please do read all of the thread. It will all become
    clear that this deadbeat troll tried to backpedal AFTER THAT FACT.

    After all this, notice he has still not explained why he hasn't taken the
    test legitimately as I did without needing to cheat, doing it properly and
    getting 150 wpm. That is because he would fail miserably proving all his
    bullshit lies and as for getting 300 odd wpm, the troll is living in cloud
    cuckoo land along with Peter Pan, Wendy and Tinkerbell.


    R - i - g - h - t


    Please do read all the thread in order. You will see he changed his tune
    quite clearly AFTER another independent poster corrected him as an idiot.
    Troll Conrad then goes on AFTER the independent poster mentions that no one
    can type 836 wpm only AFTER that did he say he was trying to ridicule me.


    R - i - g - h - t Course you was Troll Conrad ;-)


    It is all immaterial anyway, because he STILL did not take the test
    LEGITIMATELY and had to resort to CHEATING because he could not prove his
    wild, ridiculous claims because they are all bullshit!


    He is very good at putting up smokescreens to try and deflect the real
    issue. In this case, why did he not take the test legitimately in the first
    place to compare to my legitimate dictation?


    I will leave you to draw your own conclusions why. It doesn't take an
    Einstein to work it out.

    Now you remember in my previous post I mentioned "let's see if he comes back
    and tells us how he really did it by cheating another way. Instead of
    copying and pasting"?

    You notice he hasn't answered this. I told you so. This is what I suspected.

    He is the fastest copy and paste expert in the west! LOL!

    Proof that he is the lying cheating fraudulent troll that everybody now
    knows he is.


    That sounds like a backpedal as tries to deflect the communication from all
    the his bullshit he has posted to trying to blame me as being no good for
    this news group. One only has to look at what the other posters are saying
    about you sunny Jim, okay.
    Read my previous post about useful things to this VISTA newsgroup you moron.

    Troll Conrad is about as useful to this news group as a chocolate fireguard.
    All he ever does is come in here to advertise and try to sell his product
    DNS. He is a Nuance salesman with an agenda.

    The only one who is pathetic and made himself look like a prize twat is
    Troll Conrad with all his backpedalling bullshit.

    Everybody now knows you are lying, cheating fraudulent troll who just copies
    and pastes everything and then just posts it in this news group. B - F - D!


    You have not dealt with this lie because it is ISN'T a lie. Nor are any of
    the others.

    1. I dictated the test document in the typing/dictation speed test. (He
    actually copied and pasted it several times over)

    2. It is conceivable that Dragon would be able to interpret somebody
    properly, speaking at 600 wpm.

    3. It is conceivable that Dragon would be able to interpret somebody
    properly, speaking at 600 wpm AND be a 100% accurate.

    4. I can dictate 836 wpm

    5. I can dictate 836 wpm with 100% accuracy

    6. I reckon I could dictate 320 wpm

    7. I reckon I could dictate 320 wpm with 100% accuracy using Dragon

    8. I can dictate 307.2 wpm

    9. I can dictate 307.2 wpm with 100% accuracy using Dragon

    10. I can dictate 260 wpm

    11. I can dictate 260 wpm with 100% accuracy using Dragon

    12. I can dictate 200 wpm

    13. I can dictate 200 wpm with 100% accuracy using Dragon

    14. I can dictate 150 wpm with 100% accuracy every time using Dragon.

    15. I do not copy and paste my sample test documents that I put in this
    newsgroup for all the WWW to see.

    16. A typist speed test cannot be compared or measured to dictation speed in
    wpm.

    17. I know how the WSR toolkit would perform when used in conjunction with
    WSR, even though I do not own a copy of the software.

    18. The WSR toolkit has to have a reviewer in it to enhance accuracy. All of
    the other features within it will not perform this function.

    19. WSR is crap.

    20. I am not a liar.

    21. I am not a cheat.

    22. I am not a bullshitter.

    23. I am not a fraudulent troll

    24. I am an expert in the field of speech recognition.

    25. I know what a homonym is.

    26. I know what a homophone is.

    27. Spelling correctly is not important.

    28. I am not a salesman promoting Dragon in this news group

    29. Tutu is a homonym of to, too and two.

    30. Tutu is a homophone of to, too and two.

    31. The words to, too and two do not come out spelt correctly when used in
    context dictating with Dragon and WSR.

    32. I was only trying to ridicule Andy regarding the 836 wpm speed dictation
    test scenario

    33. I do not make up my own rules regarding speech dictation speed and
    accuracy.

    34. I do not backpedal.

    35. The new 'Show Numbers' software for Dragon is better than the WSR
    version.


    andy t
     
    andy t, Mar 9, 2010
    #4
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.