Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird
It seems you guys all have missed my only point.
|
No, we got it. It's probably just a combination of some people think it is just silly while others don't care altogether.
Quote:
|
When somebody "signs" something by making three crosses, "X X X", then the question must be asked whether he can read or not. And when he can not, then it could happen that somebody puts just any paper on his desk, says "this is what we said yesterday, law X or treaty Y or rule Z, please sign it and then it becomes legally valid." But since the guy signing it cannot read it, he maybe makes something very different a law, a treaty valid, a rule. In other words: he has no control.
|
Okay.
Quote:
|
The spiral cable that this man is painting, has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with any signs of writing letters. Like making three crosses. As long as this man has not presented something readable in his writing, and has not demonstrated his ability to read a given text off the paper, I will assume he is an illiterate. When somebody signs something by making three crosses, or now a spiral cable, then I only assume that until the opposite is proven. He would not have been the first impostor climbing on the career ladder, or the first illiterate hiding his handicap successfully by delegating everything that could have given his secret away.
|
Sounds good. I'm sure you'll let us know in painful detail how that works out for you.
Quote:
|
And do not get me started on what a graphologist would say about this "signature".
|
What would a graphologist say about this "signature"? Inquiring minds want to know.
Quote:
|
So I ask again: has it ever been demonstrated that this man actually can read and write?
|
Probably.