Oh the madness ...

Discussion in 'Free Thoughts' started by Chagur, May 18, 2002.

  1. Porfiry Nomad Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,127
    I'll keep this brief, since people have covered most of the issues.

    Yes, freedom of speech is not absolute. It is not absolute here, nor anywhere. However, sciforums has and always will be exceedingly tolerant, presuming simple rules of conduct.

    Primarily, messages should be on topic and relevant. Otherwise, we might as well eliminate the forums, categories, & threads and make one large pit where everyone can shout and hope to be heard above the noise. If this is not in the interests of the community, speak your opinion now.

    Secondly, responses in a thread should be productive -- that is to say they should contain something of intelligent value. Messages that are unjustifiably insulting or entirely tangential belong elsewhere (Free Thoughts or a new thread). This is partly a consequence of the medium -- threads persist forever, and unproductive messages are of no value. This is also fairly standard social etiquette. If this is not in the interests of the community, speak your opinion now.

    Relevancy and productivity are not just social etiquette in any situation, they are fundamentals in the philosophy of communication and linguistics. The fact that this medium is impersonal does not mean these principals should be abandoned.

    These prior two rules of conduct apply mostly to the topic-oriented forums. Free Thoughts is the striking exception where almost anything goes and where there is no moderator. I do not recall ever moderating a thread in Free Thoughts.


    Now, in the particular instance of Banshee, I have received but one message regarding her conduct (from Chagur). If others feel strongly about this, they should have sufficient self-certitude to come to me bearing rational arguments. The fact that this has not happened, and the fact that people like (Q) think they are justified in dictating terms to Banshee without even consulting me suggests that this is more of a personal attack than anything else.

    No one but me is justified in telling Banshee (or any other moderator) what she can or should do. However, everyone is justified in telling me.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Xev Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,943
    All very good, and easy enough to follow.

    Yet....

    What dictation of terms, Pofiry? I did not observe such, on that thread. Q defined the function of a moderater, and asked Banshee to do her job.

    As for her conduct, I have found it to be egegriously partisan.

    This is hardly somthing that Q and Chagur are alone on. However, I had not thought to report such behavior - it seemed like 'snitching'. Nor do I like to annoy a webmaster with "The mods are being meeeeean to meeee!". Bad netiquette.

    Please accept my apologies on this, as I seem to have led you to a incorrect conclusion.

    If you like, I shall outline my arguments via PM, but I feel that it would be pointless.

    Edit to add:

    I unwittingly let my silence be interpreted as consent. I am truely sorry, both to Q and Pofiry, for that. I have agreed with the Q and Chagur on Banshee's partisan behavior, but, I did not see fit to complain.
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2002
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Porfiry Nomad Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,127
    If we're talking about the same thread, (Q) told her what her responsibilities were and said she must resign if she did not perform. Perhaps 'dictate' is too strong a word, but the essence is the same.

    In the same thread, (Q) accosted her for not dealing with a thread that was in Science & Society, a forum she obviously has no control over. Either he's totally clueless on how the forum is run and the moderator system, or he's just being an asshole.

    How so? Outline them here, if you want. I'm admittedly not up to speed on everything that's going on here since I was (mentally) absent all of April and a good portion of May. Air your grievances. I'm listening.
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Xev Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,943
    Pofiry:

    I feel that Banshee has been selective in which rules she enforces. As evidence, I point to the fact that my characterization of FoxMulder as a 'f---- mental' (although obviously as a term of endearment) was edited out, yet our Mr.G is insulted (http://www.sciforums.com/f68/s/showthread.php?s=&threadid=4929&pagenumber=5) and she does nothing.

    FoxMulder's insult to Tyler: "Because you are deluded, blind, and do not have the gray matter to realize the TRUTH!" is not edited out. She edits his posts once - once - when he is extremely egegrious.

    This is not impartial.

    I ask her a question, and she deletes it without explaining why. I and others are left to wonder why she deleted.

    She seems to have had a reason for deleting (as it was an announcement - yet we had no idea.) I find it interesting to note that those asking the questions were the 'so-called skeptics' that upset her so.

    This is not impartial.

    I have no problem with rules. If Banshee wishes to take a hard line on insults, that's good for her and I'll follow or bugger off.

    However, to permit FoxMulder's insults and edit away a simple characterization, which was obviously tounge in cheek, is not applying the rules impartially. Therin is my problem, and I think that this is the Q's as well.

    I am sorry to waste your time like this, however, Q is hardly alone in this.

    And, while this is a dispute between the Q and yourself, I feel that I should add: (Audience screams "SHUT UP ALREADY!" at Xev)

    It seemed that the Q was not telling, but suggesting. This seems more a problem of mis-interpretation (on both sides) than anything else. I'd hate to lose a poster like the Q over a simple matter of mis-interpretation.

    Edit to add:

    You see why I did not contact you? It seems horridly petty, in comparison with other things. I would much rather get back to bickering over religion and politics than bicker with a mod over her behavior.
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2002
  8. (Q) Encephaloid Martini Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,855
    Porfiry

    Now, in the particular instance of Banshee, I have received but one message regarding her conduct (from Chagur). If others feel strongly about this, they should have sufficient self-certitude to come to me bearing rational arguments. The fact that this has not happened, and the fact that people like (Q) think they are justified in dictating terms to Banshee without even consulting me suggests that this is more of a personal attack than anything else.

    We are all adults here, though at times one would tend to disagree. There is little sense in complaining to you each time a member is out of line or someone is spamming the boards. That's what moderators are for.

    A request went out for Banshee to remove multiple spam from the board. Instead, Banshee welcomed the spammer and offered them to continue spamming. Is that what moderators are supposed to do ? I answered her request as to what spamming meant and she began insulting me. Is that also what moderators are supposed to do ? I suggested she was incompetent and that she should not be a moderator if she welcomes spammers to the forum. It is this you obviously define as "dictating terms." And like I said, we are all adults here. There is no reason why Banshee and I could not have settled the issue. Instead, she went crying to you and here we are.

    Free speech is not an "illusion," it is a necessity. If you oppress free speech, you destroy ideas and kill that which gives us all a reason to live.

    Porfiry, it would appear the Q is a major detriment to your forum. This voice of rationalle and reason that quite often cuts through the bullshit to reveal the underlying chaff is not what a science forum should have. The Q need not spend his time explaining difficult concepts to those that may not completely understand but have on occasion appreciated the effort, and in some cases, have helped to understand. The Q need not logically use critical thinking to debunk the latest crackpot theories and expose cranks who continuously try to pull the wool over our eyes. The Q shouldn't be taking up valuable real estate on your server with his thought provoking and informative posts.

    No, Sciforums is much better off having members like Banshee reporting the ooga-booga and having out of mind experiences and explaining how the Chakra can give you a third eye in the middle of your forehead.

    If this is your idea of a science forum, the Q wants no part of it.

    That said, I leave you to your hob-goblins, trolls, UFO's, crop circles, auras, exploding earths, aliens and other things that go bump in the night. Adieu.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Q
     
  9. Porfiry Nomad Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,127
    No. Moderators are there to primarily direct and stimulate discussion. You should contact me in the event of spam (especially when it spans multiple forums) or you have issue with another members behavior, whether they be a moderator or not.


    Tell me, have you ever been censored for anything besides an off-topic post? Can you provide a compelling example for us? Or are you just spouting bullshit?
     
  10. Counterbalance Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    373
    Thanks to Porfiry for addressing these issues. A couple of other thoughts on the matter.

    ~~~

    stryderunknown wrote:

    Note, also, that there is no mention of dissention/disagreement or general insulting listed as no-no’s. Porfiry has now elaborated and specified, but 'rule's, or their enforcement, are only part of the problem here, eh?

    ~~~~~~

    Pollux wrote:

    Q is guilty of blunt (and in a few instances) relentless disputation. One might even say ’reckless’ disputation. Doubt the Q would agree entirely. Doesn’t matter. For those who take exception, the problem may not be so much that Q disputes, or that Q disputes in a manner that grates the nerves of those whom he puts on the hot seat. The problem--as it was, is, and shall ever be--arises in how one chooses to react or to respond.

    Key words: react OR respond

    But further...

    ~~~~~~~~~~~

    Xev wrote:

    Weeeelll... what is evidence to one will not be evidence to another, ya know?. Thinking most of us understand what’s really been going on here, but then again, we can scarcely expect everybody to see it in the same way--but's that all beside the point.

    Xev is a very smart young woman. One day, perhaps, no one will have the power to insult Xev in any way, in any manner. She will not allow herself to be insulted. She will not honor such an attempt with the vaguest form of recognition. She will not ’feel’ the prick or pain of an attempted insult. She will not be threatened by someone’s choice to silence her (by deletion) when they could‘ve simply asked her, in some official and/or private manner, to post on-topic. She will have ascended unto the utmost state of feminine divinity. She will be above it all. But whenever she does care to be heard, she will find ways to do so without quite as much provocative ado. Such is the way of all great goddesses--one of which I've no doubt Xev is destined to become--if that's what she wants.

    As a goddess-in-training however, one needs must be wary of one's, as yet, not fully realized powers. You carry a big stick, Xev, and have a strong voice. How you react or respond helps to determine the 'tone' of some threads, and some of the insulting that's been going on, particularly that which has been directed to you.

    But as I said, you're a smart one. If you don't already know these things, and their importance, you will in time.


    ~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Q wrote:

    But they’re going to put words in your mouth. “They’re” going to take your, my, anyone’s statements in the wrong context. This will always happen with some people. The Q knows this. Yet the Q also appears, now and then, to have unrealistic expectations. He persists with his disputes when perhaps another tactic would prove more fruitful. He persists despite the fact that some folk cannot be hounded and the outcome be favorable for either side. The more you push, the more they’ll push back. Some don’t share the Q’s sensibilities, or lack of them. Makes one wonder about the Q's motives.

    The Q has a mighty stance and wields a powerful weapon: reason. There is no need to be overbearing, and some have perceived you so. Doesn’t matter? Well, no. Not unless they are the ones with whom you’re trying to make your point. And if you are trying to make a point, to communicate, then you want to...like, actually communicate. But you won’t communicate if you’ve erected an obstacle that you already know the reader/listener can’t overcome. Again, your priority is...?

    Regardless of how the Q may have been perceived in his attempts to make his objections known and clear, he does have a point. An arguable point.

    However, what is not ever going to be fully resolved is whether or not one side has more “evidence” of insulting or rule-breaking than the other. Futility. If we must think in terms of one side against another, then infractions have occurred on both sides. What then, pray, is the solution?

    One solution is to realize that once some lines are crossed trust and respect--if not totally lost--are at least threatened. What Freedom of Speech was being allowed here has recently been threatened.

    And Freedom of Speech is indeed a freedom to be valued and protected.

    But with freedom comes responsibility.

    And that’s the point that seems to have been consistently short-changed or overlooked here.

    ~~~~~~~

    (and last but not least...) Chagur wrote:

    Now, why are we not surprised to find YOU in the thick of things??

    take care,

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Counterbalance
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2002
  11. Adam §Þ@ç€ MØnk€¥ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,415
    Q

    If you're still around, I would like to point out that there is indeed a place for fairies, trolls, and ooga-booga at Sciforums. That's why we have the Pseudoscience, Parapschology, Religion, and Philosophy forums.

    Everyone

    In Australia we do not have that freedom of speech thing. We assume we have it, and most of us would probably punch any politician who tried to prove otherwise. But we don't have it.

    As for freedom of speech in Sciforums, well, to put it bluntly, if you come into my house, you obey my rules. This BBS is owned by an indivdual, Porfiry, not by the wonderfully egalitarian US government. In my house, you are free to speak as you wish, as long as you remain civil. Our actions are guided by us, not by others. If someone says something you find annoying, you do not need to start tossing around insults. You have the ability to remain civil.

    By authority granted by Porfiry, certain areas of Sciforums are Banshee's house. Is she supposed to watch everything and edit every single post which might be offensive? That's up to her. I know I would find it very bothersome.
     
  12. Xev Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,943
    CB, if you have a problem with me, you could either:
    A: Have the balls to state it outright.
    B: Have the balls to state it without being snide and sarcastic.
    C: Have the balls to explain what the hell it is.

    There's no call to hyjack this thread to entertain me with your inept attempt at a flame. If you care to, you can send me a private message containing all the snide insults you wish. I shall ignore further efforts on this thread.

    Q, Pofiry: I reiterate my earlier contentiont that this is being blown a bit out of proportion.
     
  13. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    I agree adam

    In fact here we have laws AGAINST personal atacks

    Its called defermation

    That is the law against personal atack without PROOF
     
  14. Counterbalance Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    373
    Xev.

    As I wrote to Q:

    And you have.

    And now you have choices:

    --Continue to assume the worst and react.

    --Or think about it and respond.

    --Or leave it be.


    Regardless, you were in no way being insulted. If that had been my intention, I would have left you in no doubt.

    This thread has not been hijacked.

    ~~~

    Counterbalance
     
  15. Pollux V Ra Bless America Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,495
    Adam summed up the responsibilities of a moderator. This is not Q's place to dictate what is true and what isn't, regardless of evidence or stature on the forums. We're not in the US. We're on the internet.
     
  16. Pollux V Ra Bless America Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,495
    BTW Xev,

    This makes no difference to me. Age discrimination will definitely be a problem for me for a few more years but this coming from someone who has just 'emerged from the pit' makes me angry. If anything that I said was misinterpreted as an insult then I'm sorry, but I believe that the insult was just a misinterpretation.

    It looks like you just did, Xev.
     
  17. wet1 Wanderer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,616
    Due to time constraints I have not been able this past week to particpate as I normally do. I have however, kept check on the forums.

    In my forums it was posted, by announcement, that editing would take place for those posts that were off topic. I enjoy banter as much as the next but there is a time and place for all things. The posts I edited were in no manner on topic and I will not debate the right or wrong of it. I gave sufficent warning that such would happen if the direction of the thread's original topic wandered. The first time that it happened, I left a note in place of the post that I edited the post. This left the poster with credit for the post even though the content was removed. Second offenses resulted in the deleting of the entire post.

    I did not feel it was incumbent upon me to tell the general populace-at-large of sciforums that the civility that has made sciforums what it is today has gone seriously awry. Nor did I feel that it was up to me to single anyone out of the populace for example. Those who have complained have identified themselves.

    If I have hurt someone's feelings in the process, I will not apologize for warning was indeed given. If those who wish to try it to see if I was serious, they have had an answer. This will continue within my forums. I have no intention of wading through several years of posts within my forums to set things right, so things that are already there will remain.

    As a last note, it is not my intent to tell the forums that this, or any other change in the future, is or is not Porfiry's wishes. What transpires through pm is not open to the general population of sciforums for discussion.
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2002
  18. Squid Vicious Banned Banned

    Messages:
    595
    While I tend to find Q a fair bit on the arrogant side (even the "the" bit smacks of self-importance) , I would be most unimpressed to see him go. At least he's entertaining to read.
     
  19. Porfiry Nomad Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,127
    I agree entirely, Xev. I always agree with you, Xev.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    As we can see unfolding, this thread is becoming just another place to vent pent up bitterness and air long-standing personal grievances that may or may not be relevant to anything.

    Perhaps it really is time for my "Bitterness & Vitriol" flame forum where we can all scream at each other and get it out of our systems.
     
  20. Pollux V Ra Bless America Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,495
    I suggested it a long time ago

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  21. Lesion42 Deranged Hermit Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    800
    Hmm... We still need an uprising of the peasants, though.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  22. Xev Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,943
    Pollux, I believe I was called a 'squabbling infant' and accused of insulting before being being insulted. Hence my pointing out of your age. While I realize that being ignored due to your age must be annoying, I don't think accusing your seniors of childish behavior is the best way to avoid that. I'll no longer pursue the matter.

    Pofiry:
    "I agree entirely, Xev. I always agree with you, Xev."

    Of course you do, I'm always right.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    "As we can see unfolding, this thread is becoming just another place to vent pent up bitterness and air long-standing personal grievances that may or may not be relevant to anything."

    Yes, I think it is. I like your idea of a special forum dedicated to 'bitterness and vitrol', or, as I like to say 'take it to private message - insult all you like without hyjacking threads'.

    Lesion:
    "Hmm... We still need an uprising of the peasants, though."

    *The French surrender*

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  23. Chagur .Seeker. Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,235
    Oh well, why not? ...

    Since Porfiry referred to my PM regarding the situation with
    Banshee, I feel it appropriate to post it so that all know where
    I'm coming from and what I said regarding the matter.

    Take care, all.
     

Share This Page