• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged RD Forum shutting down

Dragoonster said:
Really? I say brutal things like that all the time to friends, or on message boards.
Click to expand...

Just sayin'. Are these friends also ones who walk in the Internet world?

I wouldn't know what they suggested to their co-workers, as I wasn't spying on them. As a common worker I'd hear some "I'd like to beat his ass" for current supervisors at the time. It was a very high stress, underpaid job which required a lot of venting, but no one acted on it.

I do see the difference, but also see it as similar venting. It's a human response.
Click to expand...
See response to other post. Basically, the reason you can see it for what it is because you've _been_ there. But Dawkins doesn't use the Internet, so he sees it quite, quite differently.

That's true, but his response didn't actually respond to any of the criticism. Even supervising hundreds or thousands of people, if one of your minions made egregious errors that seriously upset most of them, wouldn't you respond to those errors and not imply that it was all the fault of the workers?
Click to expand...
This assumes that Dawkins considers Josh's actions to be errors. I'm trying to avoid debating the precise circumstances around the issue because it'll take a lot of detective work on my part to dig up the exact sequence of events, and to try to correlate both sides' stories and ferret out what -actually- happened (sorry, but I know better than to take either side's word as gospel on this).

I guess I thought Dawkins' bottom-line was rationality and fair debate, so his response seems antithetical to what he's most known for, and to the purpose that his "employees" in the form of users had gravitated to his site for.
Click to expand...
As noted above, I lack the information to make a substantive assessment.
 
remirol said:
As I've said before, I think the users have every reason to be upset. It's not easy when a social community is effectively completely obliterated. But at the same time, I think many should have expressed their displeasure in a more constructive manner.

It's OK to be angry. It's even OK to show it (contrast, again, "that's ****ing stupid" with "fistful of nails") to a degree. But you gotta make sure people are willing to lsiten to you. :/
Click to expand...

I agree, but it seemed like the ship had sailed at that point.

Dawkins really is clueless about the Internet. He doesn't walk in this world.
Click to expand...

Yeah, once again this seems to be one of the major causes of how everything got so dramatic.

This actually is probably the (unexpected) best way there is to illustrate the difference. I've worked on factory floors _and_ in corporate America's conference rooms. And like the Internet, the factory floor is a completely different world. What is tolerated and "normal" there would horrify people who aren't used to it -- because a lot of what's said there _isn't_ said in polite society. And even on the factory floor, the people who can control their anger and get themselves heard will rise to the top -- because the floor needs people who can walk in both worlds, who can serve as an interface between the floor and the conference room. If the people in the conference room directly heard what's said on the floor, they'd flip their lids.

That's exactly what's happened in this case. On the Internet, the "fistful of nails" remark is an amusing turn of phrase. But in the real world, it's something completely different -- and all the forum members who weren't good at controlling their anger made an effort to be heard by the "conference room." Well, it heard 'em... and it flipped its lid, predictably.
Click to expand...

That's an excellent observation. I remember one of my fellows going up to another floor's deskjob area and using the same language and impropriety he'd been using on the factory floor. The husband of one of the women he'd done this too met him after work and threatened to beat him with a tire iron for what he'd said (which I won't repeat)!

However in this case the top floor of Dawkins did make some statements in the past that suggested he valued the community, or undestood some of its purpose or draw. Maybe he didn't, or maybe he did get upset precisely for your reasons, community be damned.

I can't predict the future, sadly. Perhaps nothing would've changed. What I can say is that at least people would've been listening. Right now, though, the lines of battle have been drawn and everyone's got their ego invested in it. That means there won't be any backing down on either side, and that's a loss for everyone concerned.
Click to expand...

From looking through all this the loss was already guaranteed for one side. The "positive" that might develop from this is in a dissection of the events and the forum admins/Dawkins response. As well as how its been presented in the media, sort of a contest of which "truth" to present--the reknowned celebrity vs. the rabble or independent bloggers. And not a conciliation of any sort, but that wasn't going to happen after the initial forum blow-up. But perhaps at least a lesson (one more among hundreds) on how NOT to handle a forum shut-down. As well as responses by both sides afterwards.

And perhaps a slight pop of the Dawkins balloon. I don't know much about him or his fans but now and then get the sense he's a bit revered. It's always good to realize no one is infallible. And that a person can be respected in one area but criticized in another.

Since this is the most agreeable exchange we've had I think I'll bow out.
 
Last edited:
remirol said:
And like the Internet, the factory floor is a completely different world. What is tolerated and "normal" there would horrify people who aren't used to it -- because a lot of what's said there _isn't_ said in polite society.
Click to expand...

Is this naive and innocent Dawkins you portray really so easily manipulated by his minions?

One of the main complaints against Dawkins is that he often seems unable not to be insulting to those he disagrees with. Indeed, he has made a career out of it!

It is, therefore, hard not to see his outrage at the expressions outrage as fabricated, for political reasons. I would expect better from a critical thinker.
 
JihadJane said:
One of the main complaints against Dawkins is that he often seems unable not to be insulting to those he disagrees with. Indeed, he has made a career out of it!

It is, therefore, hard not to see his outrage at the expressions outrage as fabricated, for political reasons. I would expect better from a critical thinker.
Click to expand...

It appears that you've reiterated the tu quoque response that was already moved to AAH once, and added on some CT-quality material as a bonus. :oldroll:
 
remirol said:
If you recall, the original announcement said "please don't email Richard directly". There's a reason for that, and the most logical reason is not that the people in charge were trying to hide things from Richard. He knew there'd be upset people; he just didn't want to be overrun with complaints when the decision was already made.
Click to expand...

But that's not what the original announcement said. That's what the the message to the moderators said. If they had asked the membership in general not to email Dawkins then your explanation of not wanting him inundated with complaints would be plausible. But directing it only at the very small group of people who you have trusted to run the forum for years? Not plausible at all. It rather suggests instead that they didn't want anyone, even just a few people with relevant knowledge and experience, to communicate in any way with Dawkins.

What it seems to be to me is simply a case of bad management. Dawkins and Josh apparently had very little interest in the forum. They paid for it and made sure it kept working, but otherwise had nothing to do with it. When they came up with a new idea, they didn't bother talking it through with the people actually involved in the day to day running of the forum, and instead just handed down instructions from on high.

In fact, it's not even necessarily fair to say it was bad management. That assumes that the point of running the website and forum is to keep its members happy. If you instead assume that Dawkins was focussed on the content of the site itself and doesn't really care who spends their time commenting on it, it's no longer really a case of bad management, and simply a case of not caring about the feelings of bunch of anonymous people that you have no interest on. It then comes down to nothing more than opinion. Those who spent time and effort there are annoyed at the lack of consideration shown to them, while those in charge continue not caring in the slightest how those people feel, or even whether they exist or not.

It may be argued that this is a bad attitude to take and will affect his popularity and the popularity of his website. However, this just doesn't affect that many people. The forum had a membership of around 80-90 thousand. In January Dawkins stated that The God Delusion has sold over 2 million copies just in English (I don't know if it's been translated to other languages). As far as Dawkins is concerned, 80 thousand people is barely more than a rounding error.

Should he care? Well, it would certainly be nice to have shown them a bit more respect and courtesy, no matter how few people it involves. But from his perspective I imagine he simply has no idea where all the hate has come from, due to what seems to be an insignificant technical change to a website only affecting a small number of people.
 
Cuddles said:
If you instead assume that Dawkins was focussed on the content of the site itself and doesn't really care who spends their time commenting on it, it's no longer really a case of bad management, and simply a case of not caring about the feelings of bunch of anonymous people that you have no interest on. It then comes down to nothing more than opinion. Those who spent time and effort there are annoyed at the lack of consideration shown to them, while those in charge continue not caring in the slightest how those people feel, or even whether they exist or not.
Click to expand...

You may well be right that he didn't care, but if that's the case, why did he pretend to by making this much quoted comment a couple of years ago:
Richard Dawkins said:
“It is a community, and that is a valuable part of it. Many of our forum threads have an atmosphere of friends going out for a drink and chatting. I think that is valuable, and I don’t think we should insist on sticking to serious topics. That would be a good way to stifle the sense of community, and that would be a real shame.” (October 2008)
Click to expand...

I still think he doesn't have the full picture, that he's delegated the responsibility and is trusting the person he's delegated to; it's not obvious that what might appear to a non-internet-savvy person as a minor change to the format could actually destroy the community that had developed. Whether he would care any more if he had the full picture is another matter.
 
zooterkin said:
You may well be right that he didn't care, but if that's the case, why did he pretend to by making this much quoted comment a couple of years ago:

I still think he doesn't have the full picture, that he's delegated the responsibility and is trusting the person he's delegated to; it's not obvious that what might appear to a non-internet-savvy person as a minor change to the format could actually destroy the community that had developed. Whether he would care any more if he had the full picture is another matter.
Click to expand...
You do have to give him full credit for one thing:
He is backing his employee with his statements. Unlike most employers, certainly public sector employers, he is not publicly throwing his manager to the wolves.
 
95theses said:
I guess it could be worse.

We could be complaining about complaining about this when there are other things in the world than complaining about the complaining about the closing of a forum.
Click to expand...
Indeed. The hypocrisy is so bare naked that one has to marvel at the lack of self-awareness.
 
Oh how I wish the people complaining about the people complaining about the people complaining would just shut up!
 
remirol said:
As I've said before, I think the users have every reason to be upset. It's not easy when a social community is effectively completely obliterated. But at the same time, I think many should have expressed their displeasure in a more constructive manner.

It's OK to be angry. It's even OK to show it (contrast, again, "that's ****ing stupid" with "fistful of nails") to a degree. But you gotta make sure people are willing to lsiten to you. :/

Not me; I recognize that they're entertainment, as opposed to actual logic. But it's also important to note that I walk in the same world they do ("real world", not "TV america") and I can understand that they're just shouting for attention.

Dawkins really is clueless about the Internet. He doesn't walk in this world.

This actually is probably the (unexpected) best way there is to illustrate the difference. I've worked on factory floors _and_ in corporate America's conference rooms. And like the Internet, the factory floor is a completely different world. What is tolerated and "normal" there would horrify people who aren't used to it -- because a lot of what's said there _isn't_ said in polite society. And even on the factory floor, the people who can control their anger and get themselves heard will rise to the top -- because the floor needs people who can walk in both worlds, who can serve as an interface between the floor and the conference room. If the people in the conference room directly heard what's said on the floor, they'd flip their lids.

That's exactly what's happened in this case. On the Internet, the "fistful of nails" remark is an amusing turn of phrase. But in the real world, it's something completely different -- and all the forum members who weren't good at controlling their anger made an effort to be heard by the "conference room." Well, it heard 'em... and it flipped its lid, predictably.

I can't predict the future, sadly. Perhaps nothing would've changed. What I can say is that at least people would've been listening. Right now, though, the lines of battle have been drawn and everyone's got their ego invested in it. That means there won't be any backing down on either side, and that's a loss for everyone concerned.
Click to expand...

^^This^^

I agree with all of this.

remirol, I'm curious, since you work in this area, what is your take on Josh's deleting the admin logs which showed which deletions were made, and when. Why would he find it necessary to do that? It seems suspicious to me, because I can't think of any reason he'd need to do that if not out of dishonesty or perhaps childish lashing out. Is there a more mundane/practical reason that I'm unaware of?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom