[EDIT: I don't know why OP deleted the post, but basically he said that he had done a survey using Qualtrics, then created an excel file and gave it a name, but when he downloaded the file to his computer, the name of the file was "Home - The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations." He had never heard of Tavistock before that, nor did the name Tavistock appear anywhere on his computer.]
What do you think the file name change to Tavistock might mean?
To me it suggests that (all or some) files generated by Qualtrics are also sent to the institute or some other related institute. Somehow there was an error in their program and it renamed your document.
If you keep digging on Tavistock, you'll find some really interesting things. For example:
That last one is from an interesting book written by Cara St. Louis and Harald Kautz-Vela called 'Dangerous Imagination, Silent Assimilation.' There is some very far-out conspiracy stuff in that book, but damn it's compelling. You can find videos of them on you tube talking about their work. Cara deals with the Tavistock stuff; Harald with the more technology related aspects. He's pretty far out there. I think there is a good chance that they are both disinfo agents, though. But still interesting to listen to.
I think it's interesting to see just how influential the Institute is, how many other things it has funded. But it doesn't really have big name recognition. Certainly not like Brookings or RAND or something. Even some of the centers and institutes that receive funding from Tavistock have a higher profile. It was also formally established the same year as the CIA. Perhaps more than coincidence?
I am a science major so I'm generally pretty skeptical towards conspiracy theories
You said you're a psychologist. I also have a PhD degree in the social sciences. Up until the beginning of this year, I was also 'pretty skeptical towards conspiracy theories.' I still am, because there is so much disinfo and misdirection out there, but now I'm open to entertaining them.
What I realized is that my earlier approach was not scientific. I dismissed the theories, either because they seemed implausible or impossible. But what I realized is that there are two parts to a conspiracy theory: the evidence of what happened (or is happening), and the theories about why it happened (or is happening). I used to dismiss the theories before examining the evidence, which from a scientific viewpoint is ass-backwards. First assess the evidence, then the theory. What I also realized is that sometimes theories are put "out there" in order to make people unwilling or unlikely to examine the evidence.
Like the notion that Sandy Hook was a hoax perpetrated by Obama to promote gun control. The possibility that it was a hoax seemed completely absurd to me, and pinning it on Obama seemed like right-wing nutrackery to me. Also, if they want to promote gun control, they don't seem to be doing a very good job of it.
But after I started looking at conspiracies, I turned to Sandy Hook and, to my shock and surprise, I found the evidence for a hoax to be compelling (and the evidence for kids really being murdered to be very thin). Despite my initial skepticism that such a hoax would be impossible, I was able to overcome my cognitive dissonance, and realize that the evidence for a hoax was too strong. Though I think the theory about who did the hoax and why is mostly wrong.
Think of it this way: you find a dead body alone in the middle of a field. You wouldn't just assume it was a suicide, even if you didn't know who did it or what their motive was. You wouldn't avoid an autopsy just because everyone in town came up with some crazy conspiracy story about aliens killing him or something. No, you would do an autopsy and examine the evidence for whether or not he was murdered and how. Then you would go about trying to figure out who did it and why. And even if you never found out who did it or why, or were never able to prove it, you would still know that he was murdered.
I think conspiracy "theories" need to be approached like that. Keep an open mind. Examine the evidence. If the evidence points you to a conclusion that you find uncomfortable or even absurd, that doesn't mean the evidence doesn't exist. In some cases, the evidence is so strong that the conclusion cannot be denied. As Sherlock Holmes said, "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
Now, I don't think you'll find that level of evidence in the case of the Tavistock Institute. In fact I don't think you'll find it in many conspiracy theories. But you will find it in some. For example, 9/11. That's what got me into this. In particular it was this documentary:
It's long, but well worth watching. This shorter one might also be enough to jar your curiosity.
Again, I encourage you, as a scientist, to look at the evidence first. Then decide if the evidence is strong enough. Try to be aware of your cognitive dissonance and don't allow it to bias your assessment of the facts. And if you want to really use some jargon: your null hypothesis about what happened on 9/11 would be the official story as written in the 9/11 commission and NIST reports. So watch the documentary and see if there is enough evidence to falsify your null hypothesis. Remember that you don't need to have an alternative theory about what happened in order to reject your null hypothesis. (Although alternative theories do exist.)
On second thought, you probably shouldn't. It might precipitate a radical shift in your worldview that is very difficult to deal with on a psychological or emotional level. Many 'conspiracy theorists' feel that way. There are many posts about it here. That would actually make for a fascinating research topic, regardless of whether you eventually go down the rabbit hole or not.
To me it suggests that (all or some) files generated by Qualtrics are also sent to the institute or some other related institute. Somehow there was an error in their program and it renamed your document.
That's what my first thought was too, it just seems odd that the generated name wouldn't appear on the website when downloading the file but rather after downloading, choosing a name, and saving the file. It's also odd that, assuming our idea is corect, an Institute with this kind of influence and manpower would write code that would make such a silly mistake. Further more it wasn't simply "The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations" but "Home - The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations" which is the heading for their website. Honestly, I think you are correct - Tavistock has simply been granted access to Qualtrics data, but several points do throw that into question.
I'm really knew here so your nuanced meaning is way over my head. Do you mean that mentioning the T Institute will get me banned from this sub or some other website?
That really isn't THAT surprising by itself, the Tavistock Institute does work for several governments so that fact that they would be affiliated with the department of defense really isnt that surprising BY ITSELF. Could you elaborate a little bit?
Godlikeproductions is a fed honeypot run by Tavistock.. This is how they control the debate and flood the CT sphere with noise like flat-earth to discredit other fringe topics
That's what I've found so far. I have to admit, despite my skepticism, some of their former researchers were HUGE players in the psychology game in the 50's and 60's. Pretty interesting and influential work. I wonder what contemporary psychologists have to say about their work.
Yes, "Tavistock" will get you banned on another conspiracy site.
My research has led me to believe The Department of Defense is connected with the Tavistock Institute, in more than one way. (Trolling, shilling, social modification).
Watch the movie "Josie and the PussyCats".
Yes, I am being serious, as silly as it sounds.
Seriously though... Your thread and our conversations regarding Tavistock, have already got the attention of the Dept Of Defense, so say hi.
They are a neoconservative group that's apart of the bull system. British based and heavily connected to wall street. It's all about making sure that the echelon remains and that we rule the market which is used to control people. Money = mind control
Another technical mystery for /r/conspiracy to solve. I like these!
Did you check the file's metadata? Sometimes a file will have a "Title" field with a hidden name in there, and your operating system decides to promote that as the filename for whatever reason. This wouldn't happen if you created the Excel file from scratch and copy/pasted or imported csv data, but it could happen if Qualtrics generated the Excel file including some metadata they decided to throw in with it, and then you downloaded it. Qualtrics might have an algorithm that "determines" a title for your document.
How can I check the file's metadata? I tried looking at the files properties last night on my MacBook but didn't find anything interesting. I have since changed the name of the file to email to my grad mentor. Would the metadata include evidence of the hold Tavistock file name before I changed it?
I opened the files metadata using the terminal on my mac and found no evidence of the file's name having been "Home - The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations". Generally speaking, if you change a files name will the old name be in the metadata anywhere?
EDIT - INterestingly, though, the file was modified 4 seconds after it's creation. This could account for the files name being changed from what I named it to the tavistock name. But I don't know enough about computers to be sure of this.
Curious! It's not sounding like a metadata issue...
To answer your question, if you rename a file in Windows there will still be a "Previous Version" of the file maintained by volume shadow copy services. I'd assume OSX has something similar, but if it was renamed on the Qualtrics server and then you downloaded it, there should be no remnants of the Previous Version because that info would have been on their server and not embedded in the file itself.
I'm not sure where to go with this at the moment. Maybe this?
Unfortunately, the users case described in the link you added doesn't apply to my issue. Seems we have reached a dead end. I have no other files on my computer by the tavistock name nor had I ever even heard of Tavistock before this whole incident occurred. Is there any other way I could at least find proof that the file was at onetime named "Home - The Tavistock Institutde of Human Relations"? I'm, obviously, really regretting changing the files name now because I have no proof.
EDIT - here is the full meta data with the exception of my last name in certain spots.
I'm wondering if you might have had something copied to your clipboard and accidentally hit a keyboard shortcut that pasted it into the filename as you were renaming it. Has certainly happened to me.
I'm not finding a website with name or meta title of "Home - The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations". Looking at 4 different versions of their website on Wayback Archive, they never used that exact phrase with "Human Relations" in it for the title. So while it is obviously in the format of a website title, I'm not so sure it's from their website unless it's a different one than what I'm looking at. A bit of a mystery!
Other than that, I'd go with the explanation by daddie_o since this looks like a dead end.
Agreed, and it really wouldnt be that eery of them to have access to survey data if they are contracted to the government. It's also entirely possible I had it in my clipboard, but like I said I had never been to their website or heard of them before. Anyway - I really doubt anything super odd going on here, just a creepy happening. Thanks for your help! I guess the best part from all of this is that Tavistock has been affiliated with some really interesting psychologists in the past and now I am aware of their work to read them!
Tavistock is an application of Sigmund Freud's work from what I can tell. Definitely an interesting read and catalyst for conspiracy theories so thanks for pointing them out.
Unfortunately, the users case described in the link you added doesn't apply to my issue. Seems we have reached a dead end. I have no other files on my computer by the tavistock name nor had I ever even heard of Tavistock before this whole incident occurred. Is there any other way I could at least find proof that the file was at onetime named "Home - The Tavistock Institutde of Human Relations"? I'm, obviously, really regretting changing the files name now because I have no proof.
EDIT - here is the full meta data with the exception of my last name in certain spots.
25 comments
8 daddie_o 2016-07-06
[EDIT: I don't know why OP deleted the post, but basically he said that he had done a survey using Qualtrics, then created an excel file and gave it a name, but when he downloaded the file to his computer, the name of the file was "Home - The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations." He had never heard of Tavistock before that, nor did the name Tavistock appear anywhere on his computer.]
What do you think the file name change to Tavistock might mean?
To me it suggests that (all or some) files generated by Qualtrics are also sent to the institute or some other related institute. Somehow there was an error in their program and it renamed your document.
If you keep digging on Tavistock, you'll find some really interesting things. For example:
http://educate-yourself.org/nwo/nwotavistockbestkeptsecret.shtml
http://www.neilsandersmindcontrol.com/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZakbNMKvzME
https://vortexcourage.me/2014/08/17/cryptocracy-excerpt-from-dangerous-imagination-silent-assimilation/
That last one is from an interesting book written by Cara St. Louis and Harald Kautz-Vela called 'Dangerous Imagination, Silent Assimilation.' There is some very far-out conspiracy stuff in that book, but damn it's compelling. You can find videos of them on you tube talking about their work. Cara deals with the Tavistock stuff; Harald with the more technology related aspects. He's pretty far out there. I think there is a good chance that they are both disinfo agents, though. But still interesting to listen to.
And this:
https://tabublog.com/2015/12/26/the-manufactured-invention-of-the-beatles-stones-grateful-dead-and-the-birth-of-rock-n-roll-by-the-tavistock-institute-a-jesuit-corporation/
I think you can ignore all the talk about Jesuits. It's mostly misdirection or disinformation (in my opinion).
If you're interested in another thought-provoking article about the Beatles, check this out "Proof that John Lennon's Death Was Faked."
And as for the subject of Tavistock being banned on another conspiracy site and its links to DoD, here is something I found about that: https://intheknow7.wordpress.com/tag/tavistock/
I think it's interesting to see just how influential the Institute is, how many other things it has funded. But it doesn't really have big name recognition. Certainly not like Brookings or RAND or something. Even some of the centers and institutes that receive funding from Tavistock have a higher profile. It was also formally established the same year as the CIA. Perhaps more than coincidence?
You said you're a psychologist. I also have a PhD degree in the social sciences. Up until the beginning of this year, I was also 'pretty skeptical towards conspiracy theories.' I still am, because there is so much disinfo and misdirection out there, but now I'm open to entertaining them.
What I realized is that my earlier approach was not scientific. I dismissed the theories, either because they seemed implausible or impossible. But what I realized is that there are two parts to a conspiracy theory: the evidence of what happened (or is happening), and the theories about why it happened (or is happening). I used to dismiss the theories before examining the evidence, which from a scientific viewpoint is ass-backwards. First assess the evidence, then the theory. What I also realized is that sometimes theories are put "out there" in order to make people unwilling or unlikely to examine the evidence.
Like the notion that Sandy Hook was a hoax perpetrated by Obama to promote gun control. The possibility that it was a hoax seemed completely absurd to me, and pinning it on Obama seemed like right-wing nutrackery to me. Also, if they want to promote gun control, they don't seem to be doing a very good job of it.
But after I started looking at conspiracies, I turned to Sandy Hook and, to my shock and surprise, I found the evidence for a hoax to be compelling (and the evidence for kids really being murdered to be very thin). Despite my initial skepticism that such a hoax would be impossible, I was able to overcome my cognitive dissonance, and realize that the evidence for a hoax was too strong. Though I think the theory about who did the hoax and why is mostly wrong.
Think of it this way: you find a dead body alone in the middle of a field. You wouldn't just assume it was a suicide, even if you didn't know who did it or what their motive was. You wouldn't avoid an autopsy just because everyone in town came up with some crazy conspiracy story about aliens killing him or something. No, you would do an autopsy and examine the evidence for whether or not he was murdered and how. Then you would go about trying to figure out who did it and why. And even if you never found out who did it or why, or were never able to prove it, you would still know that he was murdered.
I think conspiracy "theories" need to be approached like that. Keep an open mind. Examine the evidence. If the evidence points you to a conclusion that you find uncomfortable or even absurd, that doesn't mean the evidence doesn't exist. In some cases, the evidence is so strong that the conclusion cannot be denied. As Sherlock Holmes said, "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
Now, I don't think you'll find that level of evidence in the case of the Tavistock Institute. In fact I don't think you'll find it in many conspiracy theories. But you will find it in some. For example, 9/11. That's what got me into this. In particular it was this documentary:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DOnAn_PX6M
It's long, but well worth watching. This shorter one might also be enough to jar your curiosity.
Again, I encourage you, as a scientist, to look at the evidence first. Then decide if the evidence is strong enough. Try to be aware of your cognitive dissonance and don't allow it to bias your assessment of the facts. And if you want to really use some jargon: your null hypothesis about what happened on 9/11 would be the official story as written in the 9/11 commission and NIST reports. So watch the documentary and see if there is enough evidence to falsify your null hypothesis. Remember that you don't need to have an alternative theory about what happened in order to reject your null hypothesis. (Although alternative theories do exist.)
On second thought, you probably shouldn't. It might precipitate a radical shift in your worldview that is very difficult to deal with on a psychological or emotional level. Many 'conspiracy theorists' feel that way. There are many posts about it here. That would actually make for a fascinating research topic, regardless of whether you eventually go down the rabbit hole or not.
3 z3r0thr3 2016-07-06
Great post.
1 ChiefWilliam 2016-07-06
That's what my first thought was too, it just seems odd that the generated name wouldn't appear on the website when downloading the file but rather after downloading, choosing a name, and saving the file. It's also odd that, assuming our idea is corect, an Institute with this kind of influence and manpower would write code that would make such a silly mistake. Further more it wasn't simply "The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations" but "Home - The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations" which is the heading for their website. Honestly, I think you are correct - Tavistock has simply been granted access to Qualtrics data, but several points do throw that into question.
2 daddie_o 2016-07-06
Sure does seem like a rookie mistake. But who knows...? Have you tried downloading the data again to see what happens with the filename?
1 ChiefWilliam 2016-07-06
Yeah, I tried that last night but the file didn't rename itself to the Tavistock name again. I'm not sure what that supports though.
2 daddie_o 2016-07-06
Me neither. The whole thing is weird from top to bottom, inside out. You'll never know. But the lingering doubt will remain...
3 z3r0thr3 2016-07-06
That word will get you banned from a known conspiracy site.
My research on the matter has led me to a dead end, with a sign that says DoD.
3 ChiefWilliam 2016-07-06
I'm really knew here so your nuanced meaning is way over my head. Do you mean that mentioning the T Institute will get me banned from this sub or some other website?
That really isn't THAT surprising by itself, the Tavistock Institute does work for several governments so that fact that they would be affiliated with the department of defense really isnt that surprising BY ITSELF. Could you elaborate a little bit?
7 RowdyRoddyPiper 2016-07-06
Godlikeproductions is a fed honeypot run by Tavistock.. This is how they control the debate and flood the CT sphere with noise like flat-earth to discredit other fringe topics
5 zonkerton 2016-07-06
They supposedly are big into societal control mechanisms.
3 ChiefWilliam 2016-07-06
That's what I've found so far. I have to admit, despite my skepticism, some of their former researchers were HUGE players in the psychology game in the 50's and 60's. Pretty interesting and influential work. I wonder what contemporary psychologists have to say about their work.
5 z3r0thr3 2016-07-06
Yes, "Tavistock" will get you banned on another conspiracy site.
My research has led me to believe The Department of Defense is connected with the Tavistock Institute, in more than one way. (Trolling, shilling, social modification).
Watch the movie "Josie and the PussyCats". Yes, I am being serious, as silly as it sounds.
Seriously though... Your thread and our conversations regarding Tavistock, have already got the attention of the Dept Of Defense, so say hi.
3 showmeurboobsplznthx 2016-07-06
They are a neoconservative group that's apart of the bull system. British based and heavily connected to wall street. It's all about making sure that the echelon remains and that we rule the market which is used to control people. Money = mind control
1 ChiefWilliam 2016-07-06
I'm only familiar with neoliberalism, what is neoconservatism?
0 showmeurboobsplznthx 2016-07-06
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism
1 ChiefWilliam 2016-07-06
Thanks, I was moreso interested in your interpretation, though. I know how to use google.
3 ragecry 2016-07-06
Good day sir!
Another technical mystery for /r/conspiracy to solve. I like these!
Did you check the file's metadata? Sometimes a file will have a "Title" field with a hidden name in there, and your operating system decides to promote that as the filename for whatever reason. This wouldn't happen if you created the Excel file from scratch and copy/pasted or imported csv data, but it could happen if Qualtrics generated the Excel file including some metadata they decided to throw in with it, and then you downloaded it. Qualtrics might have an algorithm that "determines" a title for your document.
1 ChiefWilliam 2016-07-06
How can I check the file's metadata? I tried looking at the files properties last night on my MacBook but didn't find anything interesting. I have since changed the name of the file to email to my grad mentor. Would the metadata include evidence of the hold Tavistock file name before I changed it?
2 ragecry 2016-07-06
https://www.macissues.com/2014/05/12/how-to-look-up-file-metadata-in-os-x/
1 ChiefWilliam 2016-07-06
I opened the files metadata using the terminal on my mac and found no evidence of the file's name having been "Home - The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations". Generally speaking, if you change a files name will the old name be in the metadata anywhere?
EDIT - INterestingly, though, the file was modified 4 seconds after it's creation. This could account for the files name being changed from what I named it to the tavistock name. But I don't know enough about computers to be sure of this.
2 ragecry 2016-07-06
Curious! It's not sounding like a metadata issue...
To answer your question, if you rename a file in Windows there will still be a "Previous Version" of the file maintained by volume shadow copy services. I'd assume OSX has something similar, but if it was renamed on the Qualtrics server and then you downloaded it, there should be no remnants of the Previous Version because that info would have been on their server and not embedded in the file itself.
I'm not sure where to go with this at the moment. Maybe this?
My Mac Just Renamed a File By Itself
1 ChiefWilliam 2016-07-06
Unfortunately, the users case described in the link you added doesn't apply to my issue. Seems we have reached a dead end. I have no other files on my computer by the tavistock name nor had I ever even heard of Tavistock before this whole incident occurred. Is there any other way I could at least find proof that the file was at onetime named "Home - The Tavistock Institutde of Human Relations"? I'm, obviously, really regretting changing the files name now because I have no proof.
EDIT - here is the full meta data with the exception of my last name in certain spots.
/Users/William/Desktop/X\ Lab/FreeWillSHUncleaned.csv kMDItemAlternateNames = ( "FreeWillSHUncleaned.csv" ) kMDItemContentCreationDate = 2016-07-06 05:26:19 +0000 kMDItemContentModificationDate = 2016-07-06 05:26:23 +0000 kMDItemContentType = "public.comma-separated-values-text" kMDItemContentTypeTree = ( "public.comma-separated-values-text", "public.delimited-values-text", "public.text", "public.data", "public.item", "public.content" ) kMDItemDateAdded = 2016-07-06 05:28:04 +0000 kMDItemDisplayName = "FreeWillSHUncleaned" kMDItemFSContentChangeDate = 2016-07-06 05:26:23 +0000 kMDItemFSCreationDate = 2016-07-06 05:26:19 +0000 kMDItemFSCreatorCode = "XCEL" kMDItemFSFinderFlags = 16 kMDItemFSHasCustomIcon = (null) kMDItemFSInvisible = 0 kMDItemFSIsExtensionHidden = 1 kMDItemFSIsStationery = (null) kMDItemFSLabel = 0 kMDItemFSName = "FreeWillSHUncleaned.csv" kMDItemFSNodeCount = (null) kMDItemFSOwnerGroupID = 20 kMDItemFSOwnerUserID = 501 kMDItemFSSize = 103571 kMDItemFSTypeCode = "TEXT" kMDItemKind = "Comma Separated Spreadsheet (.csv)" kMDItemLastUsedDate = 2016-07-06 08:31:12 +0000 kMDItemLogicalSize = 103571 kMDItemPhysicalSize = 106496 kMDItemUseCount = 3 kMDItemUsedDates = ( "2016-07-06 04:00:00 +0000" ) Williams-MBP:~ William
2 ragecry 2016-07-06
Yeah thanks it doesn't seem to be the metadata.
I'm wondering if you might have had something copied to your clipboard and accidentally hit a keyboard shortcut that pasted it into the filename as you were renaming it. Has certainly happened to me.
I'm not finding a website with name or meta title of "Home - The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations". Looking at 4 different versions of their website on Wayback Archive, they never used that exact phrase with "Human Relations" in it for the title. So while it is obviously in the format of a website title, I'm not so sure it's from their website unless it's a different one than what I'm looking at. A bit of a mystery!
Other than that, I'd go with the explanation by daddie_o since this looks like a dead end.
1 ChiefWilliam 2016-07-06
Agreed, and it really wouldnt be that eery of them to have access to survey data if they are contracted to the government. It's also entirely possible I had it in my clipboard, but like I said I had never been to their website or heard of them before. Anyway - I really doubt anything super odd going on here, just a creepy happening. Thanks for your help! I guess the best part from all of this is that Tavistock has been affiliated with some really interesting psychologists in the past and now I am aware of their work to read them!
1 ragecry 2016-07-06
Tavistock is an application of Sigmund Freud's work from what I can tell. Definitely an interesting read and catalyst for conspiracy theories so thanks for pointing them out.
1 ChiefWilliam 2016-07-06
Unfortunately, the users case described in the link you added doesn't apply to my issue. Seems we have reached a dead end. I have no other files on my computer by the tavistock name nor had I ever even heard of Tavistock before this whole incident occurred. Is there any other way I could at least find proof that the file was at onetime named "Home - The Tavistock Institutde of Human Relations"? I'm, obviously, really regretting changing the files name now because I have no proof.
EDIT - here is the full meta data with the exception of my last name in certain spots.
/Users/William/Desktop/X\ Lab/FreeWillSHUncleaned.csv kMDItemAlternateNames = ( "FreeWillSHUncleaned.csv" ) kMDItemContentCreationDate = 2016-07-06 05:26:19 +0000 kMDItemContentModificationDate = 2016-07-06 05:26:23 +0000 kMDItemContentType = "public.comma-separated-values-text" kMDItemContentTypeTree = ( "public.comma-separated-values-text", "public.delimited-values-text", "public.text", "public.data", "public.item", "public.content" ) kMDItemDateAdded = 2016-07-06 05:28:04 +0000 kMDItemDisplayName = "FreeWillSHUncleaned" kMDItemFSContentChangeDate = 2016-07-06 05:26:23 +0000 kMDItemFSCreationDate = 2016-07-06 05:26:19 +0000 kMDItemFSCreatorCode = "XCEL" kMDItemFSFinderFlags = 16 kMDItemFSHasCustomIcon = (null) kMDItemFSInvisible = 0 kMDItemFSIsExtensionHidden = 1 kMDItemFSIsStationery = (null) kMDItemFSLabel = 0 kMDItemFSName = "FreeWillSHUncleaned.csv" kMDItemFSNodeCount = (null) kMDItemFSOwnerGroupID = 20 kMDItemFSOwnerUserID = 501 kMDItemFSSize = 103571 kMDItemFSTypeCode = "TEXT" kMDItemKind = "Comma Separated Spreadsheet (.csv)" kMDItemLastUsedDate = 2016-07-06 08:31:12 +0000 kMDItemLogicalSize = 103571 kMDItemPhysicalSize = 106496 kMDItemUseCount = 3 kMDItemUsedDates = ( "2016-07-06 04:00:00 +0000" ) Williams-MBP:~ William