Discussion in 'Site Feedback' started by Futilitist, Dec 4, 2012.
Sorry, I guess you must be a different prometheus.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
sorry, double post
sorry, double post
http://thescienceforum.org/post9270.html#p9270 (iNow, Sat Sep 29, 2012 2:08 pm)
http://thescienceforum.org/post9442.html#p9442 (Ophiolite quoting Futilitist, Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:33 pm)
http://thescienceforum.org/post9426.html#p9426 (Futilitist, Tue Oct 02, 2012 7:10 am)
http://thescienceforum.org/post9463.html#p9463 (iNow, Wed Oct 03, 2012 12:54 am)
http://thescienceforum.org/topic807.html (Wed Oct 03, 2012 10:32 pm-Mon Oct 08, 2012 6:55 am) Two pages of reading would convince you Futilitist is a poor source of cogent arguments. The thread ended with Futilitist being banned.
(The last is, as explained above, probably not our prometheus. Our prometheus is master of all forms of calculus except, perhaps, functional.)
And perhaps you should not drag issues you have with other people on other sites to this site because some of their members may also post here.
I'm not a member of the science forum, so this is a case of mistaken identity. I also have a much nicer avatar. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
A formal complaint
I now wish to lodge a formal complaint! Is this the right place?
Oh good. Here we go.
Sorta is right! Ha ha ha! Nice try. Here is the way that quote above should have read:
So the reason it sounds like two distinctly different speakers because it actually is!
My post sorta explains things a whole lot better. Reads kinda different when you get the quotes right, huh? All in all, a very amateur frame up. The space where the speaker designation goes is still evident! Stoniphi obviously believes that no one knows how to read. He is projecting. That's a psychology term.
By the way, why go to so much (little?) effort on my account? I've never even met you. Have I? Yeah, I'm feeling real welcome here!
If you really want to know the truth, and I can tell you don't, go to my blog and read it for yourself. Here is a link: http://futilitist.blogspot.com/2012/10/picturing-ashvins-redemption.html.
If you really, really want to know the truth, I pity you. Go to:
http://www.doomsteaddiner.org/forum/index.php#c4 and check it out. But you have to sign up to see the really good stuff.
Here is the direct link to the juicy stuff after you sign in:
I sure hope you have a strong stomach. Good luck.
I don't think this is a good place. You are witnessing a crime. Run Logan, run!Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
To the Mods: You need to take this seriously. If not, this is a set up, and you know it. Do try and do the right thing here. I'm not holding my breath.
I tried to post this on the thread, but it is awaiting moderator approval. This is the first ethical test. The post is valid and should, by all rights, be approved. Should you decide not to approve my post, then you must at least remove Stoniphi's highly offensive and criminal post to me. That is only fair. That will be your second test. Pass these tests and we can go from there. Fail and I quit. Your choice, I don't give a sh!t. Hey, that kinda rhymes.
The ball is in your court. Tick tock.
---FutilitistPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
That is very good news to me. Will you look into my formal complaint please. I am being treated very unfairly. I invite you to check all the evidence out for yourself. If this is a real science forum, you will try to act ethically as a moderator. Please don't let me down. Sorry for the mixup on your screen name. Mea culpa.
I am now going to try to answer some of the other comments. Please don't hold anything against me.
Dude, in the grand scheme, mine was a very small error. Oh, will I ever be forgiven. Give it a rest. Please note that this is my first comment addressing your rude remarks to me. I never did anything to you. Why are you so hostile to me? Have you perhaps heard of me before? Why are you so interested? Chill out, little baby-man.
OK. Let me get this straight. So, you are just some average member here that I have never had any interaction with before. Right? And you volunteered your own time to read through about 35 pages of very dense material. You formulated a negative opinion of me. You have now posted your concerns about me as a public service. Wow, that is all very commendable. Perhaps you can explain why you are so interested in little old me. This is very funny. Perhaps I was expected. Why do you think I am so feared?
Having waded through the horror of your links, even I had a difficult time determining who said what in what you are accusing Stophini of misquoting, simply because the formatting is so confusing and well, crap on your blog.
You are supposedly, and I use this term lightly, since it is becoming very obvious you are a sock of a banned member at present, a new member here. As a new member, it would behoove you to not stomp in here and falsely accuse a member of staff of doing something to you on another forum and then demanding that we ban a long term and very valuable member because he apparently misread the horrendous formatting on your blog site which does look like you are the person saying what he quoted.
So no, the ball is not in our court. There is no court. If you find it so appalling here that we do not bow down to your frankly ridiculous demands, then please, don't let the door hit you on the way out. His post was not criminal, nor was it offensive. It is not his fault if you cannot format your blog so that it does not have this on top of a post that is apparently belonging to someone else. Here is the quote in full and I have included the name that appears on top. And yes, from my end, that does look like you are the person who said it:
Quote from: Futilitist on September 14, 2012, 12:14:30 PM
Even for an atheist like myself, the concept of redemption is a powerful one. But for a religious nut job like you, it just twists you up in knots. People like you never seem to be able to come to terms with their own guilt and complicity. I, too, find it tragic that I must be dragged kicking and screaming to my own crucifixion in RE's Smokehouse. But now you have to live with your part in that crime. I think it serves you right. And you call yourself a Christian! Shame on you.
The concept of redemption cannot be a powerful one for the atheist, because there is no one worthy to redeem you (that you are aware of and accept). You can't be redeemed by yourself, some human guru, the Pope or the laws of nature. Redemption only has meaning in the context of a person who is uniquely situated to forgive you for your evil nature/deeds and atone for them, i.e. Jesus Christ.
If you are implying here that you were scapegoated in a manner similar to Jesus, you are wrong. Jesus never made a huge display of what was being done to Him, and, in fact, it was all a part of God's plan. He never once blamed other people or God for the fate that He had to suffer in the name of God's truth... which is exactly the opposite of the display you have shown on these threads - it was fantastic display of projection and external blame, and it had very little to do with reasoned analysis of the truth. When Jesus was scourged and ridiculed and berated, how did He respond? Compare that to how you responded to Karpatok and me and others.
I can assure you, Sir, that there is no crime here.
I would also suggest that you do not insult people here.
I am giving you a public warning in this thread. Cease and desist.
You are new here and you have absolutely no right to demand we ban members and you have no right to drag your issues from other forums to this site and you certainly have no right to insult and abuse people here. If you fail to adhere to this site's rules, then yes, you will be moderated. Remember Futilist, posting here is a privilege, not a right. If you persist this fashion, you will face moderation. I hope I have made myself clear?
I like the new avatar. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I am not a sock puppet. I am a new member. I was banned from another site. I have come to believe that all the science discussion forums on the web are actually owned and/or financed by corporations, and run as disinformation web sites. You seem *WAY* too jumpy to me. Out of all proportion. Methinks you protest too much. I do not believe you will treat me fairly or ethically. Why should I?
Just so I'm not totally confused here, the blue name means you are a mod, right? You have already made up your mind. I'm wasting my time.
Blaming me for Stoniphi's mistake is ridiculous, IMHO. If he is a member of your staff, you should fire him for incompetence if he did not do it on purpose, IMHO. He still should apologize, though, IMHO. That way, at least other members won't treat me unfairly due to his error, IMHO. I did nothing wrong, in actual fact.
What I did at the science forum dot net was win the argument. They could never admit it. That is how we got here.
Oh yes sir, sir. You have made yourself perfectly clear. I have no rights. I get it. Thank you. Please disregard everything I said about Stoniphi. I formally withdraw my formal complaint. I am sorry, and I promise never to do it again. Good night.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
---FutilitistPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Hmm... that doesn't sound like a very good record. How many sites have you been banned from in total?
Don't you think that's a bit paranoid-sounding? Could it possibly be that everybody isn't out to get you?
It strikes me as a strange way to start your time at a new site - complaining about a long-term member after you've been here for about 5 minutes. I suggest you relax and post some content. Try to avoid antagonising people. See how that goes. Ok?
Is it your aim to "win" all arguments here, too?
One supposedly permanent, but very recently lifted. One single day timeout. Not so bad really.
I would certainly like to believe that. But I have thousands of pages of evidence in my database. Including these posts. The database consists of multiple experimental tests done at multiple different online discussion sites. I am a researcher. I am working on a PhD. in social theory. The experiments form the basis of my thesis which is about group dynamics and the scapegoat mechanism. It is a little hard for people to understand all of what is going on just by reading the threads. I am intentionally using subconscious cueing to elicit specific responses to test my theory. Each experiment is custom tailored to fit the particular gestalt of each site. Taboo subjects are raised and pressed past the point where violence would normally result in the real world. But online, these boundaries can be easily crossed without bloodshed, resulting a wealth of observable and repeatable data.
I don't think everyone is out to get me. I just wanted you to think that. But since this experiment is already over, it doesn't matter what you think.
So much emphasis on socialization, so little on science. Interesting. You seem to see me as some sort of threat to your group.
People have a hard time telling the real world from the virtual one. That is why my experiments are so successful.
Of course. It is the aim of any good scientist to win his arguments. Scientists do not agree to disagree. That is why they actually know stuff. Are you afraid?
And since I am generally right and nobody I talk to seems to mind being wrong...
I own the copyright on my posts. Be sure to ask me before you go reproducing them anywhere else, won't you?
Interesting. How did you manage to get this "research" past the ethics committee of your university?
Oh, I feel so manipulated. I fell for your clever ploy! Well done!
Not at all. I was just conducting a little experiment of my own on you. You know how it is.
Please post a link to your thesis if when it is completed. I'd love to take a look.
Of scientists? I don't think so. Then again, some of those white coats can make me a little nervous. And you know that picture of Einstein with his tongue out? I find that one a bit creepy. What do you think?
This coming from the man who seems to believe that all are out to get him...
Futilist, you have spent more time on this site complaining about it than you have done actually participating in it. Does that not strike you as odd?
I am indeed a moderator here.
And I can only make up my mind on what I see and all I have seen from you thus far is that you seem to be demanding we change and/or ban members. I have also seen you falsely accuse another member of staff and then disparage several of our respected and valuable members.
And neither did he. The post he quoted from your blog does look as if you are the person who said it. Demanding he be banned and accusing of having committed a crime is, frankly, ridiculous.
You do realise that the other forum you are speaking about has nothing to do with this site?
So why are you dragging the issues you appear to have had there, here? We do not care.
When you joined here, you joined, one would presume, to post here. Instead you have been combative, insulting, you have dragged your issues you have on other sites here and then you have criticised the format of this site, demanded others be banned... I could go on.
From what I read there, you did not win the argument. You won at the internet, certainly, but you certainly did not win the argument. There is a subtle difference.
No you do not have any rights to storm into this site and demand that we adhere to your wishes and disregard this site's rules in the process.
thanks I am trying to be creative. Christmas like spirit and such.
I will believe you that you are NOT a puppet...
Apparently you have not seen this information...
We in green have over a 1000 posts and are considered as regular and valuable to sci...
My first impression is that you are trying your hardest to be a paranoid victim and that is a very unusual impression to be left with. If it accurately reflects your dominant intentions and behaviors then you run the risk of becoming a persistent pain in the ass.
I am a member here with a common level of privileges with respect to this site. I don't think many here would describe me as "average."
It is certainly true that I have no conscious memory of encountering this exact posting behavior under this exact pseudonym.
My time is my own. I thank you for realizing that my use of it was a public service.
Meh, I've seen denser. In fact, I wouldn't put those threads above a 10-th grade reading level by my estimation. It's hardly rocket science. By the way, I prefer to read rocket science.
Close! I formed multiple opinions of you -- all negative. But they differed from each other in significant ways.
Being "not average," I am a paragon of so many virtues that I would be hounded by the many admirers of my god-like talents -- if it weren't for those pesky tragic flaws.
While forming my many opinions of you, none of them were that I was interested in you, the human being behind the pseudonym "Futilitist." I was, rather concerned for the feelings of this site's prometheus, whose job (in my opinion) is rather onerous and doesn't deserve unwarranted attacks on his character and judgement. I also thought it would be unfair for him to either have to engage with you or have to research to find the source material behind the claim.
Unclear antecedent. Maybe you don't know funny.
Gosh. As someone who is merely "not average" this seems like a breathtaking claim to global fame and renown. I think only Dennis Markuse/David Mabus is actually expected on certain forums that he has not yet posted on before.
Cites claims which are not in evidence. And (see below) may be an attempt to manipulate.
I believe arguments are won with evidence and logical argument. You demonstrated that iNow warned you that your behavior was unwanted and your posts were idiosyncratically formatted in a manner inconsistent with the forum's desired posting style and that iNow took specific action to abort your flood of unwanted posts, which by definition is the role of the site moderator. I don't recall you arguing a thesis from these demonstrated claims, but that site's Prometheus thought you demonstrated iNow was doing a good job in a reasonable manner and that you were indeed on a spamming run.
It's the job of lawyers to win arguments, because they are partisan and mercenary. It is the job of scientists to pursue the nature of reality and necessarily they use observation, logic and math, and a professional collegial tone in publication. This is why, where the experimental record supports it, there is just one science and not "Australian science," "Indonesian science," "Japanese science", etc.
I am not a lawyer, but intentional infliction of emotional distress would seem to be an event that gives rise to legal liability in some jurisdictions and negative publicity in all jurisdictions. To do this to unsuspecting, uncompensated, human non-volunteers would seem a paternalistic ethical breach of the same type (if not the same magnitude) as the Tuskegee syphilis experiment. It seems that you forgot the first law of sociology: Groups of people are collections of humans (and you, also, are a human).
Experiments are well-performed or not-well-performed -- theories are successful or not. And I believe it is you who is having a hard time distinguishing a real discussion forum of pseudonymous actual human beings from a computer simulation of interaction with human beings. The term "virtual" only properly applies to the second.
Your use of "afraid" and "threat" seem to indicate you are trying to manipulate James R in the style of your previously disclosed "experiments" at other sites.
We do not heed their dismal sound, // For joy reigns everywhere around. (epigraph from Gilbert and Sullivan's The Mikado)
Inserting crude terms to manipulate people winds up making your posting style less cohesive and leads to low estimation of your ability to process thought and compose English. You may never again attain James R default estimation of your good will and potential to contribute to this forum.
Futillist, whats the statue?
Who's futile, you or I? Or do you step on the futile? Whats with the name?
Separate names with a comma.