He'd just done a long interview with Coppolino (who I think published his paper) so I assume he would be interested in the feed back. I noticed he engaged quite a bit with commenters on his Nov22 interview with Torsten Engelbrecht published by Off-Guardian. I asked Coppolino if he'd be commenting and he replied "he's free to" or something like that.
So if someone comments on 1 platform they're obligated to comment on all platforms, and are sketchy in your mind if they don't? Again, he doesn't even have a SS account that I know of. If you have evidence to the contrary, please share it.
Not obligated but as it must have been one of the first interviews he'd done since his paper was published in English, maybe even the first, that Coppolino had also published it on his site and that Scoglio's stated aim in giving the interview was to foster further discussion on the subject ("we need to have a discussion with those who are on our side who take GO for granted, believe it"), yes I would have expected him to comment. I can't remember if you need to open a SS account to comment but I imagine it's not hard to do.
And discussing on SS is the only way to have a discussion?
I don't open accounts on every platform so that I can respond to comments under my interviews. Life's too short. And Stefano is a busy man, not someone who spends much time on social media that I can see.
I didn't say "discussing on SS is the only way to have a discussion" but that given it was his first interview on the subject after his paper was published in English by Coppolino on his site and that both he and Coppolino explicitly invited comments at the end of the interview, one might expect he would respond to at least some of the comments. Instead of that, Coppolino shut down the GO discussion, tried to shift the debate to virus/no virus issue (which just about everyone agreed on anyway), ignored important comments challenging Scoglio's claims - like those of John Lukash, but others too and banned or threatened to ban those he didn't agree with or couldn't answer. In reply to a comment, Coppolino said "He knows where this is published...Let's see if he shows up for the party" so I imagine he was hoping he would turn up. Anyway, as busy as he may be, I'm guessing Scoglio read the comments and realised a number of the commenters had researched the subject more thoroughly than himself.
You have clearly said/implied that Stefano should have commented on SS, and wrote on another thread "But that's a debate to have on Coppolino's show" - after I gave you Stefano's 20 page pdf on the topic of "graphene" that you apparently hadn't read yet even though it was included in Eric's article with the interview (https://planetwavesfm.substack.com/p/another-year-another-war-stefano#details).
Were you aware (as PM and I were) that that interview was conducted months before Eric finally published it?
Should Stefano have cleared his scheduled for months, waiting for Eric to finally publish so that he could be available to start commenting when you think he should?
How is Stefano responsible for Eric shutting down the comments? And how do you know that Stefano wouldn't have eventually chimed in if they hadn't been shut down?
I don't see any evidence that "graphene" actually exists in his articles, just references to "graphene" that he seems to assume exists.
Elsewhere in the comments under Eric's article I see people citing blogs about "graphene", patents and company websites as proof that "graphene" is real. Well we know there are "virus" patents and zillions of articles and companies discussing "viruses", even though they've never been shown to exist.
So can you point me to actual evidence of "graphene" existing, from these people who you say have researched the subject more thoroughly than Stefano?
Right, so there's no surprise Stefano didn't engage in the comments if/when he's not even on ss.
He'd just done a long interview with Coppolino (who I think published his paper) so I assume he would be interested in the feed back. I noticed he engaged quite a bit with commenters on his Nov22 interview with Torsten Engelbrecht published by Off-Guardian. I asked Coppolino if he'd be commenting and he replied "he's free to" or something like that.
So if someone comments on 1 platform they're obligated to comment on all platforms, and are sketchy in your mind if they don't? Again, he doesn't even have a SS account that I know of. If you have evidence to the contrary, please share it.
Not obligated but as it must have been one of the first interviews he'd done since his paper was published in English, maybe even the first, that Coppolino had also published it on his site and that Scoglio's stated aim in giving the interview was to foster further discussion on the subject ("we need to have a discussion with those who are on our side who take GO for granted, believe it"), yes I would have expected him to comment. I can't remember if you need to open a SS account to comment but I imagine it's not hard to do.
And discussing on SS is the only way to have a discussion?
I don't open accounts on every platform so that I can respond to comments under my interviews. Life's too short. And Stefano is a busy man, not someone who spends much time on social media that I can see.
I didn't say "discussing on SS is the only way to have a discussion" but that given it was his first interview on the subject after his paper was published in English by Coppolino on his site and that both he and Coppolino explicitly invited comments at the end of the interview, one might expect he would respond to at least some of the comments. Instead of that, Coppolino shut down the GO discussion, tried to shift the debate to virus/no virus issue (which just about everyone agreed on anyway), ignored important comments challenging Scoglio's claims - like those of John Lukash, but others too and banned or threatened to ban those he didn't agree with or couldn't answer. In reply to a comment, Coppolino said "He knows where this is published...Let's see if he shows up for the party" so I imagine he was hoping he would turn up. Anyway, as busy as he may be, I'm guessing Scoglio read the comments and realised a number of the commenters had researched the subject more thoroughly than himself.
You have clearly said/implied that Stefano should have commented on SS, and wrote on another thread "But that's a debate to have on Coppolino's show" - after I gave you Stefano's 20 page pdf on the topic of "graphene" that you apparently hadn't read yet even though it was included in Eric's article with the interview (https://planetwavesfm.substack.com/p/another-year-another-war-stefano#details).
Were you aware (as PM and I were) that that interview was conducted months before Eric finally published it?
Should Stefano have cleared his scheduled for months, waiting for Eric to finally publish so that he could be available to start commenting when you think he should?
How is Stefano responsible for Eric shutting down the comments? And how do you know that Stefano wouldn't have eventually chimed in if they hadn't been shut down?
I found your comment with the links to John Lukash's articles (https://planetwavesfm.substack.com/p/another-year-another-war-stefano/comments).
I don't see any evidence that "graphene" actually exists in his articles, just references to "graphene" that he seems to assume exists.
Elsewhere in the comments under Eric's article I see people citing blogs about "graphene", patents and company websites as proof that "graphene" is real. Well we know there are "virus" patents and zillions of articles and companies discussing "viruses", even though they've never been shown to exist.
So can you point me to actual evidence of "graphene" existing, from these people who you say have researched the subject more thoroughly than Stefano?