Apparently, many people seem to have completely misunderstood my original post, although I thought that I wrote it very clearly.
(At least Tahoe27 seems to have understood my meaning.)

It was not meant to be funny, snarky, or even as a comment on the validity or lack or validity of theories. NOT. MY. POINT. AT ALL.

-glurk

Posts, like emails, can often be interpreted very differently. I think if we were all having an in-person conversation, the tone of your voice and expressions would make it obvious you meant no insult or snark towards anyone. Unfortunately, the printed word, by people who don’t know each other, doesn’t convey attitude and intent very well.

Your post was interesting to me for the simple reason that it really illustrates how little we know about Z. traveller1st has a signature slogan that really illustrates this: "I don’t know Chief, he’s very smart or very dumb." Even that question we really don’t have an answer to. Maybe the 340 is pure gibberish (crack-proof.) Maybe Z just got very lucky with the known murders and got caught after Stine for something else. Maybe he was fairly dumb & lucky, brilliant, or somewhat smart but insane.

Anyway… allowances should be made when reading posts, and people shouldn’t be too quick to be sensitive. I know I’ve made a couple posts shooting down someone’s theories and I mean no harm or insult. This is one long-running investigation/debate and I think we are all somewhat frustrated by lack of evidence, mistakes made by LE, people who seem uncooperative (and other difficulties in obtaining information) and so on. It’s hard to accept the fact that so far, and possibly forever, Z has won his miserable game.

It would be impossible to construct every post and convey every opinion in such a way that someone couldn’t interpret it as possibly being insulting to somebody. Best solution is for people to just let stuff go and not worry about it.

Glurk,

I now understand how I must read your post. Probably it was because English isn’t my 1st language that I read something else in it than you intended. I have to agree with Marshall that written words can be "read" differently than spoken words.

It would be impossible to construct every post and convey every opinion in such a way that someone couldn’t interpret it as possibly being insulting to somebody. Best solution is for people to just let stuff go and not worry about it.

Very wise words Marshall.

At times, I have also perceived/misinterpreted messages on this forum as threats towards my person and beliefs. There are 3 things at play here.

1. The nature of the message (threat level).
2. Personality of the perceiver (sensitivity, misinterpretation, etc).
3. Stress level of the perceiver (how much is the person already under attack).

I also think that everyone lacks empathy for things which they are not, or not have experienced, because they can simply not relate. I can very much relate to sensitive individuals because I’m sensitive myself and recognize it from experience.

I think Marshall is correct as well. Sometimes misunderstandings are because of native language differences, and sometimes they are just from not knowing the background / writing style of the poster.

There are many people on these boards who have very different backgrounds. Some are very sensitive, emotional people, and some are very logical, analytical, and objective. It’s the whole "left-brained VS. right-brained" argument.

Neither side is wrong, and some people lean one way or the other. Maybe some people have a perfect balance, although I have never met anyone like that.

In any case, what I try to do is just take folks at their word and assume they mean well. I’ve never felt threatened by anyone here, myself.

I sometimes wish that I could be a writer, and express exactly what I mean in words. But I can’t. I still try my best.

-glurk

We all understand things differently, because it’s possible by the ambiguity of our language.

A good example of this is given by a Zodiac phrase: "In this cipher is my identity."

To me, the cipher plaintext is his identity, as he defined somewhat of his personality and motives. But other people, have been looking for a name.

That’s why I finished my posts with a smile, because I’m smiling for real and I’m not being ironic.
Anyway, let’s move on.
Marcelo Leandro

Jarlve wrote:

To me, the cipher plaintext is his identity, as he defined somewhat of his personality and motives. But other people, have been looking for a name.

Jarlve, you gave me an idea to try to solve the identity in the cipher-challenge… Could it be that… Oh, better post it in another thread…. Thanks!

I’m not following Eduard / don’t understand what you mean.

Strange as it seems (I think) understand what you two talked.
Jarvle refers (I think) that the code is "ID" of the author and killer (ZMF) and not their identity (name)
Placing Jarvle gave insight Eduard in another way, do not look for texts (names) in the codes but the "EGO", but do not know which way. Noam Chomsky, please help me, did someone will understand me !!!
Marcelo

Marclean wrote:

Strange as it seems (I think) understand what you two talked.
Jarvle refers (I think) that the code is "ID" of the author and killer (ZMF) and not their identity (name)

That was what I read in Jarvle’s reaction as well.

Placing Jarvle gave insight Eduard in another way, do not look for texts (names) in the codes but the "EGO", but do not know which way.

Marclean,
Yes, You did understand me.
Z-researchers are looking for hidden text mainly because the other cipher was a cipher with a text inside. What if, this time Zodiac didn’t need to put text in it because something else is in the cipher: A cipher without text in it? Nobody would suspect that.
I have a theory how Z intended the cipher to be used. Just a theory at this moment. I think we need to peek between the pines to see something interesting in the cipher. Let me see what comes out of this all…

Marclean,
Yes, You did understand me.
Z-researchers are looking for hidden text mainly because the other cipher was a cipher with a text inside. What if, this time Zodiac didn’t need to put text in it because something else is in the cipher: A cipher without text in it? Nobody would suspect that.
I have a theory how Z intended the cipher to be used. Just a theory at this moment. I think we need to peek between the pines to see something interesting in the cipher. Let me see what comes out of this all…

Yup !! It is and will be a very interesting approach.

I will wait for your topic about it.