MR complains about being moderated

[exchemist]

If that's another veiled threat that you're going to ban me, then at least have the courtesy of telling us all why you are considering doing that. I posted one comment on your abusive behavior in light of your new resolve to be more polite and civil, and you make a whole new thread with it about me complaining about being moderated. Now you are threatening to ban me permanently for god knows what reason. What have I done recently to merit a permaban? You always make these claims supposedly based on past posts of me lying and being this horrible troll, most of which you have already banned me for. What have I added to this alleged history of treachery that suddenly warrants threatening me with permanently being banned? And when are you going to respond to the points I raised already with you in this thread?

Self awareness: nul points.

 

[Magical Realist]

Self awareness: nul points.

Do you have anything substantial to contribute or are you just doing your one-liner cheerleading of James as usual?

 

[James R]

I asked Magical Realist to give me his best pitch for why he should remain a member here.

If that's another veiled threat that you're going to ban me, then at least have the courtesy of telling us all why you are considering doing that. I posted one comment on your abusive behavior in light of your new resolve to be more polite and civil, and you make a whole new thread with it about me complaining about being moderated. Now you are threatening to ban me permanently for god knows what reason. What have I done recently to merit a permaban? You always make these claims supposedly based on past posts of me lying and being this horrible troll, most of which you have already banned me for. What have I added to this alleged history of treachery that suddenly warrants threatening me with permanently being banned? And when are you going to respond to the points I raised already with you in this thread? You have yet to prove me or Yazata have ever lied at all about anything. And you have no evidence I am posting just to get a rise out of members like a troll would do. Support your claims James. Set a good example for everybody. The world is watching.

So, almost a week late, still nothing from you in response to what I asked you to consider.

Noted.

 

[James R]

I spent some time last night, for example, looking through Magical Realist's "Everyday Anomalies" thread. Other readers are invited to do the same. ....

"Stop trolling. You know what happens when you get caught out at that." - James R (post #20)

Absolutely unbelievable! Hypocrisy on a scale that simply beggars belief. WHO ARE YOU TRYING TO KID !!!???

It's a mystery how axocanth apparently completely failed to read my post #18 in that thread. Having missed post #18, axocanth clearly didn't understand the context of post #20. Moreover, axocanth clearly missed all the other threads in which I had similar discussions with Magical Realist (if you can call them that, given MR's habitual dishonesty when it comes to attempts to discuss these kinds of matters with him).

I must say, axocanth, you've been gradually losing your marbles since you signed up under your current name. You made an okay start, if a bit belligerent. But now you're not even trying to make a fair evaluation of the available evidence.

You should be aware that the sort of partisan barracking you have turned to tends to lower your overall credibility among reasonable people who read your stuff. I suggest that rather joining the likes of Magical Realist in his mire of dishonesty, evasion and personal animosity, you might like to try keeping to the higher ground. Do you think you can do that?

Yazata's post #35, meanwhile, is magnificent, the most intelligent piece in the entire thread. No wonder he also is targeted by the malevolent elements on the site who have little to offer but vacuous slogans of the form "We have mountains of evidence. You have none".

All of the ground in post #35 has been extensively covered by myself and others, with Yazata, in threads other than MR's throw-away "tongue-in-cheek" thread (as he described it).

Again, it's a pity that axocanth hasn't delved into any of those discussions, blinded as he apparently is by what he sees as Magical Realist's brilliance.

Perhaps post #35 is, indeed, the most magnificent post ever made on a forum. Or maybe it isn't. For the most part, I agree with it, so it can't be all bad, right?

 

[DaveC426913]

[DUPE]

 

[axocanth]

Since another member (exchemist) has recently taken to referring to myself as "axocunth", evidently inspiring the glee of his comrades, I have filed a request for a change of username to "axocunt" to be more in line with the spirit of the site. This, however, requires moderator approval. Inasmuch as no moderator has ever shown any objection to myself being repeatedly referred to as a cunt by the aforementioned member, not to mention a liar and a troll par excellence by his fellows, including James himself, I see no reason why this small favor should not be granted.

James may look on this as my last request, the way I would like to be remembered by both other members and myself if or when I look through old posts on the site again. A man needs to know his place, after all. After that I further request that he delete my account entirely.

While certain members -- a small few but, alas, the most frequent posters and the purveyors of apparently interminable spite -- may revel, immune to all disciplinary repercussions, in the routine belittlement, dehumanization, slander, and character assassination of certain other members (another select few, need I even mention names?), it's not an atmosphere I feel comfortable in. I would, however, suggest that this kind of tribalistic hounding results only in the extermination of free thought and, conversely, in the promotion of stultifying conformity to whatever doctrines the tribe deems acceptable.

They will, of course, explain this as character flaws in those they harass (e.g. various psychological deficiencies in my case, as well as pathological dishonesty in all their adversaries) rather than any opposition to the expression of heretical views per se. "Let a hundred flowers bloom. Just don't be a smarmy cunt" might be inscribed on their coat of arms. "No one loves UFOs or challenges to scientistic orthodoxy more than we do. It's just that all our interlocutors appear to be habitual liars and cunts with hidden agendas and axes to grind" as a sub-motto. They will, of course, convince no one except themselves.

In short, I would suggest your site is being poisoned, all opposition to the dubious, often ludicrous, claims of the Old Boys silenced one way or another.

But it's no longer my problem and I am no longer yours.

 

[wegs]

When the cat's away...

Okay, so I'm a tad busy in "real life" right now and I don't have a lot of time to devote to this.

Just quickly: Try to focus, people!

The topic of this thread is, explicitly, Magical Realist's complaints about him being moderated. It is not an excuse for axocanth to try to hijack yet another thread into yet another discussion of his "anti-scientific method" mission. Nor is it the place to ask why we have a Fringe section (again) and whether we ought to have one. Nor is it the place to try to re-prosecute old gripes about whether a UFO had lit windows or whether 2+2=4. I don't have time now, but later I will be splitting the off-topic discussions to the existing threads where they belong. I suggest you all prosecute the old issues in the threads where they first came up, if you think you're going to make progress on those things.

On topic, then. I asked Magical Realist to give me his best pitch for why he should remain a member here. Given the constant lies and trolling from him - and sadly, we've seen more of that sort of thing from him in this very thread - there are good arguments for why now might be an appropriate time to draw a line under the whole sorry mess he's made of himself here.

I will make a decision on this shortly, but it won't be right now, because busy.

So, Magical Realist, if you've got it in you to do any better, now would be a good time to start demonstrating that. I'll be back to see how/whether you got on with that, later.

Some of these issues though come up, because this thread stems from those issues. *shrug*

 

[axocanth]

Latest update from staff:

"Your username change to axocunt has been rejected. Reason: new username is inappropriate"


Funny old world, eh? Anyone else on the site can call me a cunt and not a whisper of protest is heard from our crack team of incorruptible moderators. The only person, it would appear, who is not allowed to call me a cunt is myself.

Go ahead with the account deletion, please, so that I may refer to myself as I please without tedious interference.

 

[James R]

axocanth:

Since another member (exchemist) has recently taken to referring to myself as "axocunth", evidently inspiring the glee of his comrades, I have filed a request for a change of username to "axocunt" to be more in line with the spirit of the site.

That has not been brought to my attention. Nobody - yourself included - has filed a report referencing any offending post(s).

Do you have some sort of in-principle objection to using the reporting system that has been provided so that moderators can handle exactly these types of complaints? If not, perhaps you could try filing a report.

I quickly checked the current thread. In it, there is no reference to yourself using that name, other than by yourself.

This, however, requires moderator approval. Inasmuch as no moderator has ever shown any objection to myself being repeatedly referred to as a cunt by the aforementioned member, not to mention a liar and a troll par excellence by his fellows, including James himself, I see no reason why this small favor should not be granted.

You still haven't read our site posting guidelines. Now might be a good time to do that. There's a helpful section on user names and another helpful section on appropriate ways to refer to other members.

James may look on this as my last request, the way I would like to be remembered by both other members and myself if or when I look through old posts on the site again. A man needs to know his place, after all. After that I further request that he delete my account entirely.

As a general principle, we will not delete all of your posts, since that would make the threads in which you have participated very difficult or impossible to follow, for future readers. Also, it's good that we have a record of your posts, just in case you decide to come back to tell an 'alternative facts' story about your posting history, at some later time.

If you wish to leave this forum, you're obviously free to leave any time you like. If you feel that you won't be able to resist the temptation to come back later, then (a) you can try to resist the temptation, while leaving your account active, or (b) you can ask me to permanently ban your account. Please let me know if you intend to leave and you want to select option (b). I will need a clear statement from you that you are requesting a permanent ban, if that's what you want.

But it's no longer my problem and I am no longer yours.

Is this your Grand Clomping Exit, then?

If so, goodbye and good luck.

Latest update from staff:

"Your username change to axocunt has been rejected. Reason: new username is inappropriate"

Funny old world, eh?

This wouldn't be so hard to explain if you took the time to read our site rules. Try informing yourself, maybe?

Anyone else on the site can call me a cunt and not a whisper of protest is heard from our crack team of incorruptible moderators.

Nobody has complained, so far.

The only person, it would appear, who is not allowed to call me a cunt is myself.

You can do that, by all means. You just can't have it as your user name. Caveat: we do have some additional rules about excessive use of profanity. You might like to familiarise yourself with those, as well, if you plan on sticking around.

Go ahead with the account deletion, please, so that I may refer to myself as I please without tedious interference.

See above. If you are requesting a permanent ban, I need you to clearly state that this is what you want.

 

[Pinball1970]

Latest update from staff:

"Your username change to axocunt has been rejected. Reason: new username is inappropriate"


Funny old world, eh? Anyone else on the site can call me a cunt and not a whisper of protest is heard from our crack team of incorruptible moderators. The only person, it would appear, who is not allowed to call me a cunt is myself.

Go ahead with the account deletion, please, so that I may refer to myself as I please without tedious interference.

Axocanth, an olive branch.

Draw a line, have a break and have a think about what you want to get out of the site.
You must accept the fact you came at everyone kind of confrontational from the off.
It puts people's back up.

I tried with you early doors because you are obviously smart and then fell out with you.

How ever being English and you being a Scot we sorted it out and had a really interesting exchange.

Exchemist requested "please don't be a c***." It was a request and that was a bit of a naughty way of putting it granted.

So, what you rek? It's fun posting while having a beer in the local watching footy.

 

[axocanth]

You must accept the fact you came at everyone kind of confrontational from the off.
It puts people's back up.

This is just complete and utter nonsense, I'm afraid, the kind of distortion of actual events that James (and others) tries very hard indeed to project, and presumably that no one ever bothers to actually check.

Within days of joining the site, among other less-than-warm welcomes, I'd been called a liar (by yourself), a troll (by Dave), and a cunt (by exchemist). See post #42 in this thread.

I challenge you or anyone else to locate anything remotely like that emanating from myself. Go ahead, use the search engine. Then report back to us. I insist.

The reason is not hard to discern: Certain members make silly claims, I point them out (rather than perpetuate the ignorance), and those certain members of a particularly nasty disposition feel embarrassed and therefore find some way to destroy the source of the embarrassment.

Now, you turned out to be quite the sweetie lol. I'm afraid I cannot say the same for the other two, and perhaps most of all, the site moderator himself who routinely and grotesquely distorts actual events, determined to discredit myself and impugn my character in any way possible.

 

[axocanth]

See above. If you are requesting a permanent ban, I need you to clearly state that this is what you want.

Yes, pull the plug.

 

[axocanth]

Axocanth, an olive branch.

Draw a line, have a break and have a think about what you want to get out of the site.
You must accept the fact you came at everyone kind of confrontational from the off.
It puts people's back up.

Just to add a wee bit more. There's no doubt I was perceived as confrontational by some insofar as I was expressing views that certain members might regard as "anti-science". This happens a lot, and it's the result, I suggest, of other members simply not having bothered to educate themselves on the aforementioned (in this thread) "extra-scientific" disciplines, such as the philosophy, history, and sociology of science.

The views expressed -- e.g. there is no such thing as The Scientific Method, or that scientific theories (typically) cannot be falsified -- are not particularly controversial in these disciplines. Indeed, it often appears that the only people who do not know these things are (some) scientists themselves and their followers. Plenty of other distinguished scientists can be heard saying exactly the same thing.

Now, once again James, especially, tries very hard to project this "anti-science" label upon myself -- something I reject -- in order to add credibility to his own character slurs against me. If I'm to be hung for expressing such "anti-science" views, however, you'd better bring a length of rope for Albert Einstein too. He -- among countless others -- says the very same things!

The "belligerence" (see James' recent posts again), then, if there can be any to speak of at all, lies in the expression of views which certain other members have simply failed to do their homework on. No, you won't hear Richard Dawkins or Lawrence Krauss say these things. Expand your reading a little and you can scarcely avoid not hearing these things.

I'm not an aggressive person, I take no pleasure in gratuitously upsetting anyone, but I do care about getting things right, as opposed to propagating the kind of mythology you'll hear from the high profile spokesmen of science, each one utterly clueless about the aforementioned extra-scientific disciplines. I doubt very much you will be able to locate any personal attacks (as opposed to contrary "belligerent" views) which were not provoked by an assault on myself first.

James continues to condescend, as if he's dealing with some naughty, truculent, fib-telling schoolchild who, in his boundless magnanimity, will allow to stay if I just clean up my act, if I just play nice.

I can't speak for Yazata and Magical Realist on this, but while cunt, troll, and similar footling imprecations might be brushed aside, if there is one thing I will not abide it is slurs on my character, and in particular, my honesty and integrity.

As I've pointed out numerous times in this thread already, it's simply an unfortunate fact of the current intellectual zeitgeist of hysterical scientism. To the Red Guards of scientism, an adversary is never just wrong, but a liar. You cannot treat people this way and not expect the kinds of consequences that we are observing right here and right now. It's unacceptable. The ones in need of a little soul-searching, I respectfully submit, at least in this regard, do not include myself.

But thanks for the olive branch. You're a sweet fella and I've come to respect you. You're a bit "in the dark" about biological systematics though lol. Perhaps in the pub sometime we'll have a good tear into the fascinating question of how a statement such as "humans are apes" is to be justified. If it's a fact at all, is it an "institutional fact", a fact constructed by ourselves in virtue of our taxonomical practices? Or is it a fact of nature?

(TheVat knows my email. First beer is on you )


Cheers!

 

[Pinball1970]

Within days of joining the site, among other less-than-warm welcomes, I'd been called a liar (by yourself), a troll (by Dave), and a cunt (by exchemist). See post #42 in this thread.

Fair enough. Perhaps your style was a little different

The views expressed -- e.g. there is no such thing as The Scientific Method, or that scientific theories (typically) cannot be falsified -- are not particularly controversial in these disciplines. Indeed, it often appears that only people who do not know these things are (some) scientists themselves and their followers. Plenty of other distinguished scientists can be heard saying exactly the same thing.

This is interesting to me

 

[Pinball1970]

as "humans are apes" is

We are apes!

 

[Pinball1970]

(TheVat knows my email. First beer is on you )

Our band plays in Scotland regularly.

 

[axocanth]

We are apes!

Do you believe "higher taxa" (genus and above) are real? A great many biologists explicitly express the view that they are not (see my quote from "Speciation" by Coyne/Orr in another place).

Now, if higher taxa are not real, how can the statement "Humans belong to [insert higher taxon here]" be true?

Answers on a postcard to Siberia.

 

[axocanth]

We are apes!

Well, you're from Manchester. You would say that.

 

[axocanth]

Our band plays in Scotland regularly.

Oh, didn't know you were in a band. What do you play? Bagpipes, haha?

 

[axocanth]

We are apes!

Just like birds are dinosaurs? Think about it.

I got obsessed with all this a year or two ago and looked into the subject in quite some depth. We could talk all night! Or at least until you get kicked out the pub for misbehaving lol.