Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Who is Brad Jesness??

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
June 20, 2005 1:31:50 AM

Archived from groups: sci.psychology.psychotherapy,soc.men,rec.ponds,alt.os.windows.xp,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Is he a real psychiatrist?

More about : brad jesness

June 20, 2005 4:49:10 PM

Archived from groups: sci.psychology.psychotherapy,soc.men,rec.ponds,alt.os.windows.xp,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <1119241910.923402.251700@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
jen__cuthbert@hotmail.com wrote:

> Is he a real psychiatrist?

This should answer your question:


The Brad Jesness FAQ 6.0 - June 19, 2005

Disclaimer: The Bradley L. Jesness FAQ is being hosted by the owner of
WilHelp.Com, Taylor Jimenez. This FAQ is about a USENET abuser and
Internet stalker named Bradley L. Jesness. He achieved initial notoriety
by abusing the newsgroup sci.psychology.psychotherapy, but has expanded
his abuse to many other groups, including, ironically, groups devoted to
discussions of Internet abuse. This FAQ was not created by the current
host and there are many individual contributors who have provided
information in the hope that the more people know about Bradley L.
Jesness, the greater the likelihood that he will realize his internet
abuse is not achieving the desired result. Make no mistake: If you
publicly (on the Internet) confront Mr. Jesness without some measure of
anonymity, Mr. Jesness will not hesitate to call your employer or even
law enforcement to harass you. As time goes on and this FAQ is seen by
more and more people, Mr. Jesness will become less and less a threat. But
vigilance must be maintained. Mr. Jesness has shown for many years that
he becomes utterly obsessed with anyone who dares confront him in public.
His obsession is well documented <http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/bca.JPG&gt;.
By the time you finish this FAQ you should have all the information you
need to protect yourself from a genuinely dangerous person.

Brad Jesness has claimed to have worked in the psychology field yet it is
not clear exactly what it was that he did. From 1995 to the present Mr.
Jesness has attempted to represent himself as a reputable authority in
the field of psychology. At one point Mr. Jesness had claimed he was a
"certified professional" but was forced to retract such claims. The
Minnesota State Board of Psychology, the Minnesota Board of Teaching,
Post-Secondary Education and Higher Education boards/agencies all say
that Brad is neither licensed nor certified by them.

Mr. Jesness has redefined internet stalking for the 21st century. He has
attempted to bully, extort, threaten and harass people who dare speak out
against his failed logic or outright, dangerous advice. With over 1005
known aliases and his abuse of anonymous remailers, Mr. Jesness has
managed to become a one man harassment army. Never in the history of the
internet has there been such an arrogant and shameless abuser. Several
thousand USENET postings over an almost ten year period can be attributed
to Mr. Jesness or his "supporters". Almost 100% of those posts were mean
spirited and/or defamatory.

Many in the field of psychology believe Mr. Jesness suffers from acute
Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). Mr. Jesness' demonstrated method
of internet abuse would support such a theory. Mr. Jesness' intense
hatred and distrust of most psychologists will unfortunately prevent him
from getting the help he so desperately needs. Apparently Mr. Jesness has
developed some kind of home-grown, half-baked theories regarding
psychology. At the heart of this snake oil is the notion that
conventional psychology is completely wrong and only Mr. Jesness' radical
approach is valid. This type of belief structure and worldview are
consistent with most people who suffer NPD. This is really unforunate for
the internet community because Mr. Jesness believes he is normal and will
never seek help on his own.

The typical M.O. of Mr. Jesness is to enlist the help of a "Supporter Of
Bradley", (SOB) to actually post the offensive material. These posts
always speak of Mr. Jesness in the third person and are written in such a
way that Mr. Jesness could perhaps try to deny his authorship. The
interesting thing about these posts is that the SOB author frequently has
really positive things to say about Mr. Jesness. To date, no one other
than Mr. Jesness has been identified as an SOB and Mr. Jesness has
offered no hard evidence that any other people are responsible for the
SOB abuse of USENET. Posting anonymously cuts both ways. The mechanism
that provides his deniability (anonymous remailers) also makes it
impossible for him to prove if someone has ever impersonated an SOB to
discredit him. The irony that an anonymous poster is so well known and
*anything but* anonymous is not lost on those who know Brad.

Mr. Jesness will also threaten legal and criminal action for those who
associate, post or talk about his FAQ too. Those who stand up to Mr.
Jesness do so at great personal risk. Mr. Jesness has threatened legal
action against all involved with the FAQ since September 4, 2001. To
date, Mr. Jesness has not made good on his threats. There is documented
evidence that Mr. Jesness has been investigated for alleged internet
stalking. Let this be a warning to all of you. Bradley L. Jesness is a
ruthless and mean-spirited person. He attempts to destroy people's
reputation out of jealously or spite and if you stand up to him, you
could be the focus of endless defamatory yet anonymous USENET postings.
The best thing to do with Mr. Jesness is ignore and avoid him. And if you
are reading this Mr. Jesness we urge you to seek out professional,
reputable psychotherapy.

The Brad Jesness FAQ Mirror Sites - As of September 2, 2004

http://www.spamblocked.com/bj_faq/
http://www.pearlgates.net/nanae/kooks/bj_faq/
http://www.the-foxhole.org/bjfaq/
http://www.thesbl.com/bradlee
http://www.insurgent.org/~kook-faq/brad/
http://www.seige-perilous.org/bwad/
http://www.morningmist.org/kooks/bj/

Many thanks to all that have provided mirrors! You have put yourselves at
great risk to make the internet a safer place.

For all major points below, references are provided to UseNet posts that
document the point. In most cases, there are many posts that prove the
point, but only one or two are provided here for each section.

FAQ Contents, select any URL to go to each section:

1. Who is Brad Jesness and why does he have his own newsgroup?
< http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/one.html&gt;
2. What is Brad posting about, anyway?
<http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/two.html&gt;
3. How can you spot a Brad Jesness post, even an "Anonymous" one?
<http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/three.html&gt;
4. How Can You Avoid Brad?
<http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/four.html&gt;
5. The nasty side of Brad.
<http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/five.html&gt;
6. Brad's Kook awards.
<http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/six.html&gt;
7. Brad and Law Enforcement.
<http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/seven.html&gt;
8. Brad the Anonymous Spammer!
<http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/eight.html&gt;
9. Brad's aliases.
<http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/nine.html&gt;
10. "Friend's" of Brad Jesness.
<http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/ten.html&gt;
11. Beta - Brad Jesness Usenet Archive
<http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/archive.html&gt;



Interesting Reading Brad's e-mail abuse
<http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/bj.html&gt;.


me
Anonymous
June 20, 2005 6:17:11 PM

Archived from groups: sci.psychology.psychotherapy,soc.men,rec.ponds,alt.os.windows.xp,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

<jen__cuthbert@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1119241910.923402.251700@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Is he a real psychiatrist?
>

Hell, he has been officially voted as not a human!

Jesness never finished any graduate training at all. None. He has never
had a job in any profession. None. He taught a single high school computer
lab, and students there rated him the worst teacher they ever had. He got
kicked out of the educ. technology program he was enrolled in, but he never
got into graduate school in psychology.

But he has claimed to be a psychologist, a researcher, university professor,
and on and on.

But the fact is, last year this 50-something loser tried to start a lawn
mowing business. It went bust! He uses his wife's computer and isp, he
doesn't even have part title to her home.

What a loser!!

Nomen Necco
Hammer of Thor, May 2005
Kali's Hotties List
Anonymous
June 20, 2005 7:40:20 PM

Archived from groups: sci.psychology.psychotherapy,soc.men,rec.ponds,alt.os.windows.xp,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

This cross-posting of this "FAQ" by a man going by a true alias,
("Taylor Jimenez") and have an anonymous domain (wilhelp.com is
anonymous via a "company" called domainsbyproxy.com). The domain
has NO
content, but just personal malice including libelous lies, just
shows AGAIN that Joe Jared of oretek.com & osirusoft.com is just a
cyber terrorist, as PROVEN and described on:

http://cyberper.cnc.net/JaredIsJimenez.htm





me <me@mememe.com> wrote in news:me-120E3E.10482420062005@pita.alt.net:

> In article <1119241910.923402.251700@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
> jen__cuthbert@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>> Is he a real psychiatrist?
>
> This should answer your question:
>
>
> The Brad Jesness FAQ 6.0 - June 19, 2005
>
> Disclaimer: The Bradley L. Jesness FAQ is being hosted by the owner of
> WilHelp.Com, Taylor Jimenez. This FAQ is about a USENET abuser and
> Internet stalker named Bradley L. Jesness. He achieved initial
> notoriety by abusing the newsgroup sci.psychology.psychotherapy, but
> has expanded his abuse to many other groups, including, ironically,
> groups devoted to discussions of Internet abuse. This FAQ was not
> created by the current host and there are many individual contributors
> who have provided information in the hope that the more people know
> about Bradley L. Jesness, the greater the likelihood that he will
> realize his internet abuse is not achieving the desired result. Make
> no mistake: If you publicly (on the Internet) confront Mr. Jesness
> without some measure of anonymity, Mr. Jesness will not hesitate to
> call your employer or even law enforcement to harass you. As time goes
> on and this FAQ is seen by more and more people, Mr. Jesness will
> become less and less a threat. But vigilance must be maintained. Mr.
> Jesness has shown for many years that he becomes utterly obsessed with
> anyone who dares confront him in public. His obsession is well
> documented <http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/bca.JPG&gt;.
> By the time you finish this FAQ you should have all the information
> you
> need to protect yourself from a genuinely dangerous person.
>
> Brad Jesness has claimed to have worked in the psychology field yet it
> is not clear exactly what it was that he did. From 1995 to the present
> Mr. Jesness has attempted to represent himself as a reputable
> authority in the field of psychology. At one point Mr. Jesness had
> claimed he was a "certified professional" but was forced to retract
> such claims. The Minnesota State Board of Psychology, the Minnesota
> Board of Teaching, Post-Secondary Education and Higher Education
> boards/agencies all say that Brad is neither licensed nor certified by
> them.
>
> Mr. Jesness has redefined internet stalking for the 21st century. He
> has attempted to bully, extort, threaten and harass people who dare
> speak out against his failed logic or outright, dangerous advice. With
> over 1005 known aliases and his abuse of anonymous remailers, Mr.
> Jesness has managed to become a one man harassment army. Never in the
> history of the internet has there been such an arrogant and shameless
> abuser. Several thousand USENET postings over an almost ten year
> period can be attributed to Mr. Jesness or his "supporters". Almost
> 100% of those posts were mean spirited and/or defamatory.
>
> Many in the field of psychology believe Mr. Jesness suffers from acute
> Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). Mr. Jesness' demonstrated
> method of internet abuse would support such a theory. Mr. Jesness'
> intense hatred and distrust of most psychologists will unfortunately
> prevent him from getting the help he so desperately needs. Apparently
> Mr. Jesness has developed some kind of home-grown, half-baked theories
> regarding psychology. At the heart of this snake oil is the notion
> that conventional psychology is completely wrong and only Mr. Jesness'
> radical approach is valid. This type of belief structure and worldview
> are consistent with most people who suffer NPD. This is really
> unforunate for the internet community because Mr. Jesness believes he
> is normal and will never seek help on his own.
>
> The typical M.O. of Mr. Jesness is to enlist the help of a "Supporter
> Of Bradley", (SOB) to actually post the offensive material. These
> posts always speak of Mr. Jesness in the third person and are written
> in such a way that Mr. Jesness could perhaps try to deny his
> authorship. The interesting thing about these posts is that the SOB
> author frequently has really positive things to say about Mr. Jesness.
> To date, no one other than Mr. Jesness has been identified as an SOB
> and Mr. Jesness has offered no hard evidence that any other people are
> responsible for the SOB abuse of USENET. Posting anonymously cuts both
> ways. The mechanism that provides his deniability (anonymous
> remailers) also makes it impossible for him to prove if someone has
> ever impersonated an SOB to discredit him. The irony that an anonymous
> poster is so well known and *anything but* anonymous is not lost on
> those who know Brad.
>
> Mr. Jesness will also threaten legal and criminal action for those who
> associate, post or talk about his FAQ too. Those who stand up to Mr.
> Jesness do so at great personal risk. Mr. Jesness has threatened legal
> action against all involved with the FAQ since September 4, 2001. To
> date, Mr. Jesness has not made good on his threats. There is
> documented evidence that Mr. Jesness has been investigated for alleged
> internet stalking. Let this be a warning to all of you. Bradley L.
> Jesness is a ruthless and mean-spirited person. He attempts to destroy
> people's reputation out of jealously or spite and if you stand up to
> him, you could be the focus of endless defamatory yet anonymous USENET
> postings. The best thing to do with Mr. Jesness is ignore and avoid
> him. And if you are reading this Mr. Jesness we urge you to seek out
> professional, reputable psychotherapy.
>
> The Brad Jesness FAQ Mirror Sites - As of September 2, 2004
>
> http://www.spamblocked.com/bj_faq/
> http://www.pearlgates.net/nanae/kooks/bj_faq/
> http://www.the-foxhole.org/bjfaq/
> http://www.thesbl.com/bradlee
> http://www.insurgent.org/~kook-faq/brad/
> http://www.seige-perilous.org/bwad/
> http://www.morningmist.org/kooks/bj/
>
> Many thanks to all that have provided mirrors! You have put yourselves
> at great risk to make the internet a safer place.
>
> For all major points below, references are provided to UseNet posts
> that document the point. In most cases, there are many posts that
> prove the point, but only one or two are provided here for each
> section.
>
> FAQ Contents, select any URL to go to each section:
>
> 1. Who is Brad Jesness and why does he have his own newsgroup?
> < http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/one.html&gt;
> 2. What is Brad posting about, anyway?
> <http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/two.html&gt;
> 3. How can you spot a Brad Jesness post, even an "Anonymous" one?
> <http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/three.html&gt;
> 4. How Can You Avoid Brad?
> <http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/four.html&gt;
> 5. The nasty side of Brad.
> <http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/five.html&gt;
> 6. Brad's Kook awards.
> <http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/six.html&gt;
> 7. Brad and Law Enforcement.
> <http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/seven.html&gt;
> 8. Brad the Anonymous Spammer!
> <http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/eight.html&gt;
> 9. Brad's aliases.
> <http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/nine.html&gt;
> 10. "Friend's" of Brad Jesness.
> <http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/ten.html&gt;
> 11. Beta - Brad Jesness Usenet Archive
> <http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/archive.html&gt;
>
>
>
> Interesting Reading Brad's e-mail abuse
> <http://www.wilhelp.com/bj_faq/bj.html&gt;.
>
>
> me
>
Anonymous
June 20, 2005 8:27:25 PM

Archived from groups: sci.psychology.psychotherapy,soc.men,rec.ponds,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

<jen__cuthbert@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1119241910.923402.251700@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Is he a real psychiatrist?
================
Does he treat koi and goldfish? ;-) You sent this to a pond and fish
newsgroup.
--
McKoi.... the frugal ponder...
EVERYONE: "Please check people's headers for forgeries
before flushing." NAMES ARE BEING FORGED.
Do not feed the trolls.
~~~ }<((((o> ~~~ }<{{{{o> ~~~ }<(((((o>
Anonymous
June 21, 2005 12:41:49 AM

Archived from groups: sci.psychology.psychotherapy,soc.men,rec.ponds,alt.os.windows.xp,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 19 Jun 2005 21:31:50 -0700, jen__cuthbert@hotmail.com wrote:

>Is he a real psychiatrist?

No, he only plays on one Usenet.


--
Taylor

Hammer of Thor, September 2002
Anonymous
June 21, 2005 12:45:28 AM

Archived from groups: sci.psychology.psychotherapy,soc.men,rec.ponds,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 16:27:25 -0500, Cracklin' wrote:

> <jen__cuthbert@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1119241910.923402.251700@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>> Is he a real psychiatrist?
> ================
> Does he treat koi and goldfish? ;-) You sent this to a pond and fish
> newsgroup.

If you watch him when you speak you'll see his mouth opening and closing,
like a fish. A bit like your Jabriol. Yuppers, I've been watching that pile
of sad as well. :) 
Anonymous
June 22, 2005 12:22:36 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Here's a short "rule of thumb" that will get you
"into the ballpark". Note that this is not absolutely
accurate regarding true depth of field, but it is close
enough that unless you're using a 7 megapixel DSLR,
you won't notice the difference unless you're a perfectionist.

Determine the actual aperture of your lenses in millimeters.
For example, the wide angle setting of my Canon A60 gives
a focal length of 5.4mm and a maximum aperture of F2.8.
Dividing 5.4mm by F2.8 (5.4/2.8) gives a result of 1.9285714.
Round this off to "2" and you have an aperture of 2mm at the
wide angle setting wide open. Convert 2mm to meters and
you get a figure of 2 meters.

Hyperfocal distance gives 1/2 the set distance as "close",
and 2x the set distance as "far". So if we have a 2mm
aperture, and set the lens for 2 meters, it will be in fairly
good focus from one meter out to four meters (about 13
feet). This is generally how fixed focus cameras are
set, although sometimes biased a bit towards "close".

This "rule of thumb" was developed for film cameras,
which do not have the true magnification of digitals,
considering the size of the CCD as compared to film.
But it does work fairly well and is handy if you don't
have a set of depth of field tables handy.

Jerome Bigge
Member, Muskegon Astronomical Society
Author of the "Warlady" & "Wartime" series.
Download at "http://members.tripod.com/~jbigge"
Anonymous
June 22, 2005 7:20:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I purchased a "refurb" CX7700 (3 megapixel, fixed focus, no zoom)
digital from Kodak's web site. They had free shipping, and the price
of the camera was $84.95. Purchased an SD 128 meg card locally
for $19.95. As I have a number of AA NiMH batteries and charger,
I really didn't need anything else. Total cost was $104.90 plus
Michigan's 6% sales tax. Much to my surprise, the first picture
I took with it was 100_0001... Meaning no one had ever taken a
picture with it! At least this is what it appears is the situation.

Camera takes pretty good pictures, much like my 2 megapixel
CX6200 which was also a "refurb" (but was sold as new by a
local store). These cameras are great "starter" cameras for
kids, or for anyone who doesn't want to invest very much in a
camera. Local Sam's Club will make 4x6" prints from your card
for $.17 each, so you don't really need a computer or printer...

I also purchased a 2 megapixel CX7220 which has a 2x zoom
and macro for the same $84.95. This has been "used", but
looks "clean" (no scratches or anything) and was an even
better bargain considering what I got for my $84.95. Kodak
will sell you a picture card along with the camera, but you
can buy these locally for a bit better a price, which is what
I did with this one too. This is a more "advanced" camera
than the simple fixed focus jobs, but not as "advanced" as
my Canon Powershot A60 by any means. Optics better than
the fixed focus jobs, but not quite up to the Canon level. Also
battery life is poor, even with NiMH, this seems to be chronic
with Kodaks, but one can live with it.

Jerome Bigge
Member, Muskegon Astronomical Society
Author of the "Warlady" & "Wartime" series.
Download at "http://members.tripod.com/~jbigge"
Anonymous
June 22, 2005 4:54:55 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Greetings Jerome,

Sorry to hear you are having some trouble with your batteries, but glad that
you were able to take advantage of the the special Kodak Offers.

Actually, due to the nature of their chemistry, Ni-MH batteries perform
better when used regularly. When they are not used or are new, their
internal
chemicals can crystallize. This is very similar to how a jar of honey that
has sat on the shelf a long time can crystallize. The crystallized part of
the battery does not hold a charge and therefore reduces the overall charge
capacity of the battery. In the case of honey, you can heat the jar to
un-crystallize it. For the Ni-MH batteries, the conditioning process below
will help reverse the crystallization and increase the capacity for holding
a charge.

Once you have used and charged your batteries a few times, I suspect
performance will improve.

Talk to you soon.

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company

>
> I purchased a "refurb" CX7700 (3 megapixel, fixed focus, no zoom)
> digital from Kodak's web site. They had free shipping, and the price
> of the camera was $84.95. Purchased an SD 128 meg card locally
> for $19.95. As I have a number of AA NiMH batteries and charger,
> I really didn't need anything else. Total cost was $104.90 plus
> Michigan's 6% sales tax. Much to my surprise, the first picture
> I took with it was 100_0001... Meaning no one had ever taken a
> picture with it! At least this is what it appears is the situation.
>
> Camera takes pretty good pictures, much like my 2 megapixel
> CX6200 which was also a "refurb" (but was sold as new by a
> local store). These cameras are great "starter" cameras for
> kids, or for anyone who doesn't want to invest very much in a
> camera. Local Sam's Club will make 4x6" prints from your card
> for $.17 each, so you don't really need a computer or printer...
>
Anonymous
June 22, 2005 7:49:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 12:54:55 -0400, "Ronald Baird"
<ronbaird@kodak.com> wrote:

Snip

>un-crystallize it. For the Ni-MH batteries, the conditioning process below
>will help reverse the crystallization and increase the capacity for holding
>a charge.
>
>Once you have used and charged your batteries a few times, I suspect
>performance will improve.
>
>Talk to you soon.
>
>Ron Baird
>Eastman Kodak Company
>
Am I missing something? I was looking forward to learning about this
conditioning process "below."

Aside from that, I am also a very happy user of Kodak "reconditioned"
cameras. They seemed new to me, so I assumed they might be excess
inventory of obsolete stocks.

Best regards,

Orrin
Anonymous
June 23, 2005 9:36:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 15:49:22 -0700 in rec.photo.digital, Orrin
Iseminger <oiseming@moscow.com> wrote,
>Snip
>
>>Once you have used and charged your batteries a few times, I suspect
>>performance will improve.
>>
>>Talk to you soon.
>>
>>Ron Baird
>>Eastman Kodak Company
>>
>Am I missing something? I was looking forward to learning about this
>conditioning process "below."

Yes, it is so simple you are missing it: "use and charge your
batteries a few times".
Anonymous
July 12, 2005 10:02:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hi Orrin,

Sorry, I have been away on vacation and assignment. I am back.

If you did not get the answer to your issue it is essentially, the charging
and depleting of your batteries a few times. Once you have done this they
should be back to normal and ready for additional use. Sorry for any
confusion.

Talk to you soon,

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company


> Snip
>
> >un-crystallize it. For the Ni-MH batteries, the conditioning process
below
> >will help reverse the crystallization and increase the capacity for
holding
> >a charge.
> >
> >Once you have used and charged your batteries a few times, I suspect
> >performance will improve.
> >
> >Talk to you soon.
> >
> >Ron Baird
> >Eastman Kodak Company
> >
> Am I missing something? I was looking forward to learning about this
> conditioning process "below."
>
> Aside from that, I am also a very happy user of Kodak "reconditioned"
!