Alex Tsakiris and the Skeptiko Podcast - CRITICAL LOOK AND OVERVIEW.

[Atwill]

Alex: At some level that’s true and at another level it’s equally true that science has been fundamentally discredited in recent years. We can look at Climate Gate or Peak Oil or even UFOs and ghosts. Even evolution. All those are topics that have come to the fore and science has had their say. In one way or another it’s come out of it pretty battered as a result.

I was just listening to that episode. Just out of curiosity, is he referring to something specific with his inclusion of those two examples of science failing? I mean, "Climategate" and the peak oil discussions, as vague as they may be as arguments in support of Alex' position, are at least concrete things, but when has "science" ever had to take a severe beating over ghosts and UFOs?

I also listened to the Seth Andrews interview the other night. I'm not a big fan of the Thinking Atheist, but I really gotta give props to him for conducting himself so levelheadedly in that sad parade. I just hope he won't take the cheap bait for a follow-up.

 

[GnaGnaMan]

I used to post as Miguel on the Skeptiko forums. Yesterday my account got effectively suspended. I can no longer post in any forum on forum.mind-energy.net nor access my PMs. As you may expect, as a skeptic on a believer-run forum I have been "banned" in the past, but so far it was only ever from the skeptiko sub-forum, and not from all the forums on the site. That way I could at least drop some people a note on my absence.
So, I'm posting this here as an FYI for anyone who wants to know.

A few days ago, one of the nastier posters jumped into a thread and insulted me as a "rude SOB" and made some accusations against me. Although there is a policy against insults, Tsakiris has banned me before for reporting threads. So, I ignored that.

The same poster then jumped into an on-going discussion on a different thread and accused me of supporting censorship. I don't mind being called names but slandering me in such a manner is something I do take offense at. So I asked that person to "please not spread lies about me".
As a result I was banned.

Part of me suspects that this was some sort of juvenile, high-school intrigue to have a semi-plausible excuse to get rid of me.

Whatever the case, I think it's time to draw a line under my experience at skeptiko.
I experienced believers as a group, and shockingly often even as individuals, to be nasty and functionally dishonest.

ETA:
The irony of having been censored for good after being accused of supporting censorship is not lost on me.

 

[Daylightstar]

...
A few days ago, one of the nastier posters jumped into a thread and insulted me ...

If I were to hazard a guess, I'd say this concerns the poster who claimed to have powers to make a psi wheel move.

In my opinion Skeptiko has only one real policy: preservation of conviction.

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Hey Miguel. I didn't realize you had been suspended from Skeptiko. What happened to the sticky thread that is supposed to announce such things?

Daylightstar makes an interesting observation.

~~ Paul

 

[GnaGnaMan]

Hey Miguel. I didn't realize you had been suspended from Skeptiko. What happened to the sticky thread that is supposed to announce such things?

It's been gone for weeks or months, disappeared quite shortly after its inception. I figured that there might be a reason for that and asking about it would be asking for trouble.

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Paqart said it was causing trouble

Apparently you can ask to be unsuspended in a week or two. Give it a shot.

Sheesh.

~~ Paul

 

[GnaGnaMan]

Apparently you can ask to be unsuspended in a week or two. Give it a shot.

My limit is reached, Paul. I was insulted, slandered and banned on a whim. Nothing of that is new and I could handle all of it. But having it all happen at once is really too much.
Besides, what will change when I return? It's not like I can chose not to be abused.

 

[Arouet]

My limit is reached, Paul. I was insulted, slandered and banned on a whim. Nothing of that is new and I could handle all of it. But having it all happen at once is really too much.
Besides, what will change when I return? It's not like I can chose not to be abused.

I'm sorry to hear that Miguel. Know that there are people who found your posts valuable and not in vain. I understand your frustration though. Maybe take a break and see how you feel in a few weeks. I've taken a couple when frustrated. I hope you come back but understand if you don't.

 

[Daylightstar]

I'm sorry to hear that Miguel. Know that there are people who found your posts valuable and not in vain. I understand your frustration though. Maybe take a break and see how you feel in a few weeks. I've taken a couple when frustrated. I hope you come back but understand if you don't.

^{Hilite by Daylightstar}Are you saying that you were banned on the Skeptiko forums before, that you then 'took a couple' and then simply 'went back'?

 

[GnaGnaMan]

I'm sorry to hear that Miguel. Know that there are people who found your posts valuable and not in vain. I understand your frustration though. Maybe take a break and see how you feel in a few weeks. I've taken a couple when frustrated. I hope you come back but understand if you don't.

I'm not frustrated. Thanks for appreciating my posts, though.

 

[Arouet]

^{Hilite by Daylightstar}Are you saying that you were banned on the Skeptiko forums before, that you then 'took a couple' and then simply 'went back'?

I think I was asked to take a couple days off once. But there have been a couple of times over the years where I took a voluntary break from the forum. The thing is, I like the discussion over there for the most part. The proponents are far more intelligent than average and many discussions require real thought and challenge to one's own position.

Most of the time I enjoy it, when I find that its stressing me out I take a break and come back later.

 

[Daylightstar]

Well then, what you describe as your (non banning) experience and the subsequent advice based on that, does not match GnaGnaMan's (Miguel on Skeptiko) description of his banning experience or the need for same advice.
I'm sorry to say that I got the impression that you wanted to obfuscate the mentioned banning.

As you seem to enjoy the conversations there to such an extent that it makes you send warm vibes that way from over here .... carry on.

 

[Arouet]

Well then, what you describe as your (non banning) experience and the subsequent advice based on that, does not match GnaGnaMan's (Miguel on Skeptiko) description of his banning experience or the need for same advice.
I'm sorry to say that I got the impression that you wanted to obfuscate the mentioned banning.

As you seem to enjoy the conversations there to such an extent that it makes you send warm vibes that way from over here .... carry on.

Gna Gna and I know each other reasonably well from that forum. I'm not really sure what your objection is but I protested his banning over on Skeptiko (though the post has now been deleted!). And I've gone to bat for him with Alex when he was banned in the past. Not sure what gave you the impression that I was trying to obfuscate the banning?

 

[Daylightstar]

The impression arose from your non-banning contextual response and advise.
Oh, I certainly think you'd bat for him, and why not , based on my memories from reading the Skeptiko fora quite some while back.

 

[Arouet]

The impression arose from your non-banning contextual response and advise.
Oh, I certainly think you'd bat for him, and why not , based on my memories from reading the Skeptiko fora quite some while back.

Just to be clear, Alex invited him to come back after a few weeks. My advice was more geared towards that.

 

[Daylightstar]

Right, so you advise him to take a break ... from what exactly? From his inability to post there and access his private messages?
And to see how he feels in a couple weeks. Supposedly to see how he will feel about the apparent inevitable invitation to come back?

Hmmm, what shall I do when Alex invites me back, shall I say yes? shall I say no? Who's to say, I don't know. That'll take a couple of weeks ...

You advised from the context of your own completely different situation.

 

[Arouet]

Right, so you advise him to take a break ... from what exactly? From his inability to post there and access his private messages?

??? the break was imposed. Right now he feels like he doesn't want to come back. My advice was too cool off but then come back.

Honestly, I don't know what we're arguing about!!

 

[Daylightstar]

??? the break was imposed. ...

... Maybe take a break and see how you feel in a few weeks. ...

If 'a break' was already imposed, why did you have to make the suggestion to take a break?
What does it say under Miguel's name on Skeptiko, "On a break" or Banned"?

... My advice was too cool off but then come back.
...

Cool off from being banned? By coming back, I suppose you mean accept the 'inevitable' invitation to come back?

...
Honestly, I don't know what we're arguing about!!

Well, I am trying/battling to get straight non-evasive answers to simple questions from you, whereas you appear to navigate the political landscape of Skeptiko, which apparently is not restricted to the Skeptiko site, which causes difficulty in getting meaningful answers from you.

 

[Arouet]

I think Miguel understood what I meant. I'll try to be crystal clear: I get that he is frustrated but value his posts, I hope he decides to come back.

I'm all for arguing for the sake of arguing sometimes but this seems to be taking it a bit far!

 

[Daylightstar]

... I'll try to be crystal clear: I get that he is frustrated ...

I'm not frustrated. ...

...
I'm all for arguing for the sake of arguing sometimes but this seems to be taking it a bit far!

Not at all.
You, in your response appeared to obfuscate the banning as a simple frustration followed by an advise to take a break and come back later.

I understand that you, in your role of/as a non-dismissive skeptic posting on Skeptiko fora has to be extremely careful. I also understand that this means you want to be as neutral as possible with respect to Skeptiko when posting here, so as not to offend the Skeptiko-believers.

There are ways to not do this, without negating an actual situation. I'd have to wonder whether they have spooked you into acting this way, or whether you want to further consolidate your role as a non-dismissive skeptic ... in the eyes of the Skeptiko believers.
Doing it the way you did here just doesn't come across as entirely honest.