S&S Memorial thread!

[Upchurch]

If their M.O. had been praising Randi, his work, and the JREF forum to the skies, I'd be very willing to bet they'd still be here, tolerated with bemusement; something like mascots.

What do you think? Please answer honestly.

How is this so difficult to understand? De_Bunk, a very pro-JREF poster, got suspended a while back. His opposite number, Aforce1, a very anti-JREF poster, never did. It has nothing to do with their opinions, it has to do with their behavior.

S&S apparently disobey forum rules and got banned. It had nothing to do with his opinions. Do you have any evidence that it did? Can you back up your claim at all?

 

[Monketi Ghost]

How is this so difficult to understand? De_Bunk, a very pro-JREF poster, got suspended a while back. His opposite number, Aforce1, a very anti-JREF poster, never did. It has nothing to do with their opinions, it has to do with their behavior.

S&S apparently disobey forum rules and got banned. It had nothing to do with his opinions. Do you have any evidence that it did? Can you back up your claim at all?

Yes I can. With Carlos, Hal carefully explained that he was not to discuss the issue. He also explained that he could not put a link in his sigline to a locked thread discussing the issue.

 

[Upchurch]

Site your source, please?

edited to add:

Originally posted by No Answers

With Carlos, Hal carefully explained that he was not to discuss the issue. He also explained that he could not put a link in his sigline to a locked thread discussing the issue.

What issue are you talking about?

 

[Monketi Ghost]

Site your source, please?

edited to add:


What issue are you talking about?

My mistake, the exchange I'm thinking of involves ex-latin.

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=20192

from the final post in The Carlos Swett Affair, from Hal:

"Carlos and Latin...

"...I believe the JREF forum has demonstrated a clear willingness to listen to all points of view on this issue, but that window now is going to close. You and Latin are welcome to continue to post on subjects other than the WTC attack if you like...."

 

[Upchurch]

From that same thread

Originally posted by hal bidlack

For example, the Carlos post above clearly violates one of the promises he made me, by again including his "sig block" which is little more than an ad for his claim. But I really do feel that Carlos is, in many other areas, a valuable contributor to this forum. In addition, I know from private PMs that he is a nice fellow.

Further from the notice of banning

In order to be reinstated, they both agreed to conditions that they have repeatedly violated. Further, when called on this, they have prevaricated endlessly.

Aparently, this signature link violated an agreed condition of either Carlos' or ex-latin's (it's kinda fuzzy) agreement to continue on the board. Again, it was their behavior (e.g. their failure to abide by conditions agreed upon) that was the cause of their banning, not the content of their opinions.

I would further point out that there and have been are other posters with more extreme view points than these two and they were not banned. How can you defend that S&S and ex-latin were banned for their opinions when it is not consistant with the history of the JREF?

 

[EdipisReks]

i haven't been on this forum long, but i've lurked for quite a while. i'm not going to miss S&S.

 

[Thanz]

From that same thread

Further from the notice of banning

Aparently, this signature link violated an agreed condition of either Carlos' or ex-latin's (it's kinda fuzzy) agreement to continue on the board. Again, it was their behavior (e.g. their failure to abide by conditions agreed upon) that was the cause of their banning, not the content of their opinions.

I would further point out that there and have been are other posters with more extreme view points than these two and they were not banned. How can you defend that S&S and ex-latin were banned for their opinions when it is not consistant with the history of the JREF?

Well, their actions were at least partly due to the censoring of their opinions. There was no real reason to move or lock the "Swett Affair" thread. Yes, they were annoying and they pretty much ignored all reasonable arguments in that thread, but the moving/locking seemed pointless. Their posts were not violating any rules at that point.

When they felt that they were being censored, they lashed out. I'm not defending the lashing out, but there was a reason for it. They were suspended for spamming, etc. From what I understand, they were allowed to continue posting so long as they didn't talk about the UFO/WTC claim. That seems to be censorship on the basis of their opinions. I don't think that this has happened to anyone else. Not even Bethke, who threatened to blind people every week.

I think the fact that this is not consistent with the history of the JREF works against your argument. It tends to support the notion that S&S and Latin alone were singled out, without good reason.

I am not sorry they are gone. I stopped reading their posts long ago. And I obviously don't know all of the details of his dealings with Hal. But I think that it is important to remember that it was a dislike of his opinions that started the whole ball rolling.

 

[Dancing David]

As a social worker I know that here are some times when you implement a new rule and everyone squawks because the rule wasn't there before.
We may never know.

 

[thaiboxerken]

I say good riddence, any troll that gets booted deserves it. S&S did nothing but try to cause trouble.

 

[Upchurch]

Well, their actions were at least partly due to the censoring of their opinions. There was no real reason to move or lock the "Swett Affair" thread. Yes, they were annoying and they pretty much ignored all reasonable arguments in that thread, but the moving/locking seemed pointless. Their posts were not violating any rules at that point.

I disagree. Why wouldn't you move a thread dealing with the Million Dollar Challenge to the Million Dollar Challenge thread? (Further, why wouldn't you move this thread to Banter since it is having less and less to do with the actual R&P nature of the thread?)

I don't know why they decided to lock the thread other than there were 1700 posts to the thread over six months, over half of which was just a repeat of the same old carp over and over again.

The only point I can't defend is the part where they weren't allowed to talk about the UFO/WTC claim, if that is, in fact, the situation. The only justification I could possibly see for that is if it came to be considered trolling and is against forum rules and within Hal's previlage to declare it to be.

I think the fact that this is not consistent with the history of the JREF works against your argument. It tends to support the notion that S&S and Latin alone were singled out, without good reason.

I fail to see what isn't consistant. Granted, the rules have changed, but plenty of warning was given when they did. Thiers was not the first thread to be moved or locked. I don't know who was the first to be suspended, but I do know that Carlos hasn't been the only one.

Carlos wasn't singled out, as far as I can tell by reading the threads. He singled himself out with his behavior.

 

[Thanz]

I disagree. Why wouldn't you move a thread dealing with the Million Dollar Challenge to the Million Dollar Challenge thread? (Further, why wouldn't you move this thread to Banter since it is having less and less to do with the actual R&P nature of the thread?)

But this thread won't be moved to Banter. Threads in Banter about Sylvia won't be moved to Paranormal or Million Dollar Channel. In fact, the thread on her response was moved TO Banter so it could get a wider audience. I don't think that any other threads have been moved from one "legitimate" forum to another - IIRC, the other moves have been to Flame Wars or BORB. The thread was moved because it was perpetually on page 1 of Banter, got a lot of hits, and some people were getting sick of it. It was moved to a much lower traffic forum.

I don't know why they decided to lock the thread other than there were 1700 posts to the thread over six months, over half of which was just a repeat of the same old carp over and over again.

The only point I can't defend is the part where they weren't allowed to talk about the UFO/WTC claim, if that is, in fact, the situation. The only justification I could possibly see for that is if it came to be considered trolling and is against forum rules and within Hal's previlage to declare it to be.

My point is that the "trolling" would have been confined to the one stupid thread were it not for the move/locking. Certainly, posting a whole bunch of threads about one topic can be trolling, and can be dealt with by Hal appropriately. I guess, in this sense, telling S&S/Latin not to talk about WTC was preventive action on what would certainly be trolling on their part. But without the whole story, we are just guessing. Again, on the actual banning, I trust that Hal made the decision that he felt was right for the forum and I have no problem with it.

I fail to see what isn't consistant. Granted, the rules have changed, but plenty of warning was given when they did. Thiers was not the first thread to be moved or locked. I don't know who was the first to be suspended, but I do know that Carlos hasn't been the only one.

You are the one who brought up inconsistency - arguing that it was not consistent to think that S&S/Latin were banned for their viewpoints. I am saying that the consistency/lack of consistency means nothing - if anything, it would argue against your point. Just because other people were not banned for their opinions does not mean that S&S/Latin received that same treatment.

Carlos wasn't singled out, as far as I can tell by reading the threads. He singled himself out with his behavior. [/B][/QUOTE]

 

[hgc]

Thanz:

My point is that the "trolling" would have been confined to the one stupid thread were it not for the move/locking. Certainly, posting a whole bunch of threads about one topic can be trolling, and can be dealt with by Hal appropriately. I guess, in this sense, telling S&S/Latin not to talk about WTC was preventive action on what would certainly be trolling on their part. But without the whole story, we are just guessing. Again, on the actual banning, I trust that Hal made the decision that he felt was right for the forum and I have no problem with it.

Hindsight is 20/20, or well, in this case not that clear.

In any case, that doesn't justify the trollish behavior, nor does it obviate the need to deal with the problem at hand in the manner that they did.

 

[Dancing David]

Uh, SPAM if you repeat the same thoughts in all forums regardless of the thread topic then I guess it is spam.

If you ain't cooin with WHAM you ain't cooking with ham.

Peace

 

[Upchurch]

But this thread won't be moved to Banter. Threads in Banter about Sylvia won't be moved to Paranormal or Million Dollar Channel. In fact, the thread on her response was moved TO Banter so it could get a wider audience. I don't think that any other threads have been moved from one "legitimate" forum to another

I don't think it's entirely true that threads don't get moved to the appropriate legitimate forum. I seem to remember a flurry of moving threads a while back, but I can't back that up. I do think it's true that it only happens when a mod notices it and feels the impetus to do something about it. Usually an out of place thread doesn't last long enough to bother moving.

My point is that the "trolling" would have been confined to the one stupid thread were it not for the move/locking.

I'll grant you, it was a mistake to put a hard stop to the discussion, but that's easy to see in hindsight.

But without the whole story, we are just guessing. Again, on the actual banning, I trust that Hal made the decision that he felt was right for the forum and I have no problem with it.

True enough. From what I saw, S&S didn't do anything worse than what Franko did other than S&S was stupid enough to draw Hal's attention to it. But, as you say, we really don't know all the details.

Just because other people were not banned for their opinions does not mean that S&S/Latin received that same treatment.

What, do you suppose, made S&S/Latin special that the did receive different treatment, then? Maybe I answered my own question above when I said that S&S was stupid enough to draw a mod's attention to his trolling (if, in fact, that's what he did).

 

[billydkid]

What I don't understand

This is what I don't understand: when I first started out in this forum it seemed like one of the main values (made clear to me by one of the moderators in no uncertain terms) was that there was absolutely no censorship. Now it seems like there is nearly continuous hysterical hand wringing about cussing or being offensive. It seems like we have some sort of a rather extreme pendulum sort of deal going on regarding this issue.

 

[ArmchairPhysicist]

You see "S&S" as the username, you pass over it. See "ex-latin", pass over it. If someone quotes them "Originally posted by~~" , pass over that. Is it so hard to do?

For some of the regulars, no this isn't so hard to do. For the numerous newcomers to the forums, those persons who are tomorrow's up and coming critical thinkers, this is impossible. They haven't been exposed to S&S yet, so they don't know that he's just one of a handful of trolls who are here with the sole purpose of...well, whatever his purpose was.

These newcomers don't know the rest of the JREF family, so their first impression is made by the more active posters on the more active threads (top of the list). S&S was most certainly not a person who the JREF wants to be the shining example of our critical thinking skills.

The aim of the JREF is to promote critical thinking. If the first thing people see when they browse the threads is some jackass ranting semi-coherently about ridiculous themes, they are less likely to stick around and browse more deeply. When people are turned off and leave, the goals of the JREF are not only not being realized, the JREF as a whole is actually taking a step backwards.

That's why some people just have to leave. Not for having controversial viewpoints, but for making the forum a hostile place that people won't want to visit.

Of course, that's just one opinion.

 

[triadboy]

What do the rest of you think? Did Carlos add anything of value to the R&P board?

He added that Christian whacky-ness that we all love. (heh) He claimed Jesus was a great revolutionary because our calendars are based on him. Laugh....I thought I'd die!

 

[Thanz]

What, do you suppose, made S&S/Latin special that the did receive different treatment, then? Maybe I answered my own question above when I said that S&S was stupid enough to draw a mod's attention to his trolling (if, in fact, that's what he did).

I think that it is partly that, and partly the subject matter that S&S was going on and on about. Hal was at the Pentagon on 9/11. S&S persistent ravings tended to have a trivializing effect on the events of that day. My personal opinion is that if S&S were talking about a UFO flying through any other building on any other day, the moving/locking/trolling/spamming/banning would not have occurred.

 

[CWL]

Dissent for its own sake isn't constructive and, in my opinion, of very little value.

Agreed. This is the core point. If S&S' chriticism would have been based on rational (or even on purported) grounds I would have been the first to defend him. However, I have seen no evidence of any such grounds. All I ever saw from him was unfounded lamentation.

 

[Upchurch]

Re: Re: S&S Memorial thread!

He added that Christian whacky-ness that we all love. (heh) He claimed Jesus was a great revolutionary because our calendars are based on him. Laugh....I thought I'd die!

Did he? I never got a strong impression of his religious standing. Not that I ever got a strong impression of his standing on anything...

In fact, it seems to me that I remember he once made a (sorta) joke to the effect of "Thank God I'm an atheist."

Also, I'd love to read the "Jesus was a great revolutionary" bit. Do you remember where that was?


Thanz,

Originally posted by Thanz

Hal was at the Pentagon on 9/11. S&S persistent ravings tended to have a trivializing effect on the events of that day. My personal opinion is that if S&S were talking about a UFO flying through any other building on any other day, the moving/locking/trolling/spamming/banning would not have occurred.

This is an excellent point. We Americans have still have very little humor about 9/11, even a year and a half later. Hal, being military and at the Pentagon when it all came down, would have less, I imagine, and understandably so.