The following pulls in an at first seemingly irrelevant but actually crucial reference to another sub-forum posting. Bear with it. Courtesy of James R's underhanded vengeful mindset, I was given a totally UNANNOUNCED (minor caveat below) 3-day 'break' beginning Sep 11, likely at ~ 1:39 PM GMT. Maybe uniquely here at SF, NO customary/obligatory email alert linking to a 'conversation', detailing the alleged reason for such a ban, was received. Quite unlike the case for the preceding two 'warnings' for alleged 'hate speech'. Well, there was discovered, once I could after 3-full days of banning log in successfully, a 'conversation' detailing my alleged 'hate crimes'. With the expected stern warnings - but NO mention there of a 3-day imposed ban. Anyway JR knew damn well that 'conversation' was completely inaccessible to me until the full 3-day ban had expired. In the interim, no-one else but forum hierarchy could have been aware. By chance the cunningly hidden in plain sight, notional-only excuse for such a ban was uncovered here: http://www.sciforums.com/threads/de...tionally-a-silent-crisis.164635/#post-3683406 Thread locked Aug 20. James R's #5 red letter 'new warning notice' for alleged 'hate speech' added 22 days later - Sep 11, 1:39 PM (hence the above time estimate for ban implementation). In fact the sole 'warning message' was a sparse notice, on trying to log in, not long after JR's disingenuous '7 questions' posting #5172, that read in full: "You have been banned for the following reason: Rules violations. Your ban will be lifted on Sep 14, 2021." Not a word about 'hate speech'. Hence JR was plain lying with his red letter, 22 days after thread locking, 'warning message' claiming I HAD been warned. He made sure there was no email alert even to that additional post there. Hence expecting I would not discover his nominally extremely out of date 'warning message' = 3-day ban, till at least 3 days later (as per above). And the true reason for that 22-day out of date 'warning message' = 3-day ban, for alleged 'hate speech'? Not hard to figure. The trigger doubtless being my harsh but accurate denunciation in #5170. And so a revenge plot was evidently hatched. Post a 'penetrating' 7 question response to my #5170 (posted Sep 11, 2021 at 1:27 PM). His #5172, - time stamped Sep 11, 2021 at 1:56 PM. Posted ~ 17 minutes AFTER having enacted the carefully secreted and disguised 3-day ban as per above, Sep 11, 2021 at ~ 1:39 PM. How neat. Starve your intended victim of any reasonably anticipated way to figure what has been actually going on, AND give everyone visiting here the impression I had no answers for the vacuous post #5172, or had just quit. True motivation and perfidy revealed clearly via the all-too-convenient, clearly linked TIMING of above highlighted post time-stamps. Ironically, fully justifying the trigger for such - my #5170. But it's evident from the subsequent JR supportive responses, in full awareness of the preceding exchanges, that 'good standing' with forum hierarchy takes precedence for many, pretty well synonymous with PC correctness. Good luck to those choosing that path. I have different leanings. Particularly since James R's humiliating unfolding debacle here: http://www.sciforums.com/threads/traveling-toward-a-light-source.160434/ , every opportunity to try and portray me as an irrational 'woo believer' has been attempted, the bulk of such attacks occurring here in 'In defence of space aliens' thread. Which leads into finally being able to give JR's #5172 the little attention it deserves: Content of which is just typical signature James R disingenuous trash. He may pretend there to be an imbecile who can't understand the obvious. That paranormal/supernatural phenomena is by it's very nature beyond human understanding. Nevertheless such diverse phenomena can and often have severely impacted many individuals affected by such. It's been explained many times but for his own egotistical ends JR chooses to continually obfuscate the clear distinction. Once again, a classic case study JR refused to view, sensing to do so would lead to an uncomfortable confrontation with hard-to-refute cumulative testimony, from a variety of responsible and reliable witnesses: As covered elsewhere, the above two are complimentary - neither capturing all the picture though each encapsulating the essentials. James R - imo a vindictive, devious, disingenuous fraud. That craftily hidden-in-plain-sight, 22-days out of date post: http://www.sciforums.com/threads/de...tionally-a-silent-crisis.164635/#post-3683406 , is obviously intended as a trip-wire that 'formally' sets me up for a permanent ban. JR elsewhere claimed no intention to life ban me because 'I was too entertaining'. But one senses that schizophrenic outlook has shifted strongly to an even earlier post where he encouraged me to just depart SF. Make up your mind JR. You know I won't be begging for any 'leniency'.