William Davis' paper in Dialogue evaluates Skousen and Carmack's Early Modern English model

[I Have Questions]

Someone made a lot of money off this silly project. Tom or Dr. Scratch posted the financials a few years ago that showed Skousen received almost $300,000.00 for one year's work on the project. That's insane.

Especially if Marcus remembers correctly and they retracted 70% of what they claimed initially.

[Tom]

Someone made a lot of money off this silly project. Tom or Dr. Scratch posted the financials a few years ago that showed Skousen received almost $300,000.00 for one year's work on the project. That's insane.

It was actually about $329,000 over six years.

viewtopic.php?p=18288#p18288

[Marcus]

Someone made a lot of money off this silly project. Tom or Dr. Scratch posted the financials a few years ago that showed Skousen received almost $300,000.00 for one year's work on the project. That's insane.

Especially if Marcus remembers correctly and they retracted 70% of what they claimed initially.

I was close!! In Feb 2021:

..but just as a reminder, based on the recent retractions published by the Interpreter, here is the count as it currently stands:

Section 1, Archaic Vocabulary: 26 proposed as archaic [out of 41 originally proposed, 37% have been retracted]

Section 3, Archaic Phrases: 14 proposed as archaic [out of 29 originally proposed, 52% have been retracted]

Section 4, Archaic Grammar: 2 proposed as archaic[out of 15 originally proposed, 87% have been retracted]

Section 7, Archaic Expressions: 7 proposed as archaic [out of 37 originally proposed, 81% have been retracted]

For an average retraction of 60% of previously published results, most or all included in the sales of hardcover, expensive publications.

[drumdude]

It’s funny how DCP is completely silent on hard hitting criticisms like this.

But the second after Noel posts a comment on SeN he stops everything he is doing to address it.