James R: The S.A.M Issue

[draqon]

Furthermore, I thought it was against the rules to start threads like this about members.

true it is against the rules, but SAM has grown to become the epitome of Sciforums, the cream puffs, the prime of the discussions...so in essence rules do not apply anymore, she became THE SCIFORUMS.

 

[Enmos]

It makes no difference. After months of suggestions and discussion on "the problem of SAM as a moderaor", when actually push came to shove, it was the hecklers gallery that was most important.

Thats how sciforums works. Its "agenda" is determined by the hecklers. So "the problem of SAM" will be resolved the same way that "the problem of SAM as a moderator" was resolved.

With scant regard for anyone's opinion on the matter.

Well, no offense, but they should get it over with if that's where it's headed.

 

[draqon]

So "the problem of SAM" will be resolved the same way that "the problem of SAM as a moderator" was resolved.

With scant regard for anyone's opinion on the matter.

James R. already said he will not ban you. Have faith.

 

[draqon]

Well, no offense, but they should get it over with if that's where it's headed.

"get it over with"

No offense, Enmos...but are you by any chance saying they should hurry up and ban SAM? No offense of course if thats not the case.

 

[Bells]

So, are we going to stop it for everyone? Or just for S.A.M.?

Let me recap:

If it were up to me right now, you'd be out with the rest of the bigots.

Pretty self explanatory, don't you think?

I doubt my willingness will have any part to play in whatever decision is reached. I have no "agenda" as you and James so succintly put it, except to highlight what I consider is wrong with the way some people are treated here. I believe I have been unfailingly consistent in that regard, across the board of race, religion or ethnicity whenever the situation has come up.

Oh, you have been "unfailingly consistent". The problem arises in that being so "unfailingly consistent", you have portrayed yourself as just a big of a bigot (be it towards Jews, atheists, and even Buddhists).

The worst part in all of this is watching people trying to cover for you. I can almost hear the nervous giggle from here and the slight hand ringing.. the whole 'zomg, it's getting out of control'.

But your sword is dull Sam. You best sharpen it if you are going to martyr yourself on it.

 

[Enmos]

"get it over with"

No offense, Enmos...but are you by any chance saying they should hurry up and ban SAM? No offense of course if thats not the case.

If that's their intention, yes.
If that's not their intention they should stop harassing her.

 

[Enmos]

If it were up to me right now, you'd be out with the rest of the bigots.

So what's the problem? You mods can't work it out? Ask Plazma.. lol

 

[S.A.M.]

The worst part in all of this is watching people trying to cover for you. I can almost hear the nervous giggle from here and the slight hand ringing.. the whole 'zomg, it's getting out of control'.

Perhaps thats a matter of perspective, but I see all the "out of control" indicators on the other side. So much so that they are not even bothering with accuracy in their alleged complaints anymore. Its like being at a republican convention hearing allegations of liberal bias without any basis.

 

[draqon]

So what's the problem? You mods can't work it out? Ask Plazma.. lol

just as Bells and Tiassa are...they are just moderators. James R overrules their decisions, he is an admin.

So trigger happy Bells better cool off her steamy butt.

 

[Bells]

If that's their intention, yes.
If that's not their intention they should stop harassing her.

I'm sorry, what?

We're harassing her?

Pray tell, how? By responding in the threads she starts or in threads started by others?

Righteo. Yes, I can see how that amounts to moderator harassment.

If we shut down the threads, and believe me, most have been shut and cesspooled, we are accused of trying to silence her or hide something or other. If we respond, we're harassing her. If we ignore her, then she accuses us of ignoring the 'issues' and not dealing with it. If we ban her, then we have silenced her. So pray tell. Just what do you think we should do?

 

[Tiassa]

The difference between theory and practice

Pretty self explanatory, don't you think?

Nope. My faith in your perception of bigotry is diminished by this controversy. While what you say is pretty self-explanatory, the effect or result—what it means in practice—is still a mystery.

You know, Bells, better than the general membership, how long I've been pushing on the issue of our coddling of bigots. I'm very disappointed that we have waited to act on it until we could contrive a pretense to hang this on S.A.M.

The problem should have been handled a long time ago. But it wasn't.

 

[draqon]

Just what do you think we should do?

beam up Enmos and whoop his ass for suggesting anything for a moderator to do

 

[Enmos]

I'm sorry, what?

We're harassing her?

Pray tell, how? By responding in the threads she starts or in threads started by others?

Righteo. Yes, I can see how that amounts to moderator harassment.

If we shut down the threads, and believe me, most have been shut and cesspooled, we are accused of trying to silence her or hide something or other. If we respond, we're harassing her. If we ignore her, then she accuses us of ignoring the 'issues' and not dealing with it. If we ban her, then we have silenced her. So pray tell. Just what do you think we should do?

You and Tiassa are calling for her banning, James says he doesn't want to ban her. You guys should make up your minds. The indecisiveness is what results in harassment.
Why are you asking me whether or not she should be banned? Tell you what, make me a moderator and I tell you what I think.

 

[draqon]

My faith... is diminished....
You know, Bells, ... issue of our coddling of bigots....

Tiassa vs. Bells? Round 2?! :xctd: I AM SO EXCITED.

 

[Bells]

Nope. My faith in your perception of bigotry is diminished by this controversy. While what you say is pretty self-explanatory, the effect or result—what it means in practice—is still a mystery.

Why? Because I am categorising Sam in the same boat as the bigots we have seen in the past and present?

You know, Bells, better than the general membership, how long I've been pushing on the issue of our coddling of bigots. I'm very disappointed that we have waited to act on it until we could contrive a pretense to hang this on S.A.M.

Oh, I am not hanging this on Sam. I am asking Sam why she has decided to join them in her crusade. And so far, I haven't managed to get a response.

I am asking an intelligent and thoughtful woman why and how she has lowered herself to their level to try to get her point across.

The problem should have been handled a long time ago. But it wasn't.

I am not disagreeing with you. But it still does not answer the question as to why she has decided to act like they have done and do so today.

 

[EntropyAlwaysWins]

As entertaining as this particular piece of sciforums drama has been I think its about time we all bloody well got over it.

I don't really care one way or the other on this particular issue, but I do find it quite annoying that a large chunk of all other discussion grinds to a halt while everyone puts in their 2 cents here.

Oh what the hell I'll put my 2 cents in as well:

To SAM and SAM's supporters:
Whatever it is your doing here, whether it be "using others methods against them" or "performance art" or whatever, in doing so you *may* have some slight chance of causing "them" to look at things in a new light and perhaps understand your point of view, and at the same time you are wilfully sinking to their level.
You are choosing to purposely abandon what shred of the moral high ground you may have had left.
You are in essence saying to this forum as a whole that intellectual discourse is unimportant so long as you can get back at them.
Is that really what you want? I sure hope not.

To SAM's critics and detractors:
Yelling louder doesn't make you any more or less right.
SAM behaving in a way that is not in keeping with your/our expectations of one engaging in intellectual discourse is not something that can be remedied with accusations of trolling/whatever.
I'm not entirely sure what will but I think a healthy dose of STFU about SAM accompanied by SAM not making 10 threads a day about ze Jews/Israel/America/westerners would go a long way.

 

[fedr808]

James may not be perfect, but he is the best eprson for the job. Seriously, can you name one person whom is as close to unbaised as Jamesr to take his place?

 

[cluelusshusbund]

We're harassing her?

Pray tell, how? By responding in the threads she starts or in threads started by others?

If we shut down the threads, and believe me, most have been shut and cesspooled, we are accused of trying to silence her or hide something or other. If we respond, we're harassing her. If we ignore her, then she accuses us of ignoring the 'issues' and not dealing with it. If we ban her, then we have silenced her.

O poor baby(s) i feel you'r pane... well not realy... cause i dont argue wit people till im blue in the face an then angerly conclude that ive been bested cause they havent changed ther mind to start beleivin "corectly" like i do.!!!

An for those who are not to childesh to avoid such threds... but still to fragile an immature to let such discusson go on between willin partisipants... then you can always stamp you'r feet an whine about "biggotry"... an if thers enuff control-freeek whiners they will get ther way an prollem solved... an then the rest of us can jus get along... well... until 1 of us begins disagreein to strongly wit the whiners who keep buggin the hell out of James R wit threats an complants.!!!

So pray tell, Just what do you think we should do?

Grow up an quit manufacturin an blowin out of purportion som issue to unnecesarly regulate speech for a ego boost.!!!

 

[(Q)]

1. Are we to believe that the posters on Sci are not adult or mature enough to find their own equilibrium regarding which threads they choose to post or respond in? We need intervention against perceived "rogue" posters?
2. Notwithstanding the negative comments regarding SAM preceding, the fact remains, that she expresses factual and rational comment, albeit at times interlaced with emotionality. Is it OK to be human?
3. I think this is a mountain out of a molehill issue.
4. Forums come and go. SAM, and spirited posters like her, is an example of why Sci sticks out and survives.
5. Having said that, I am sure, given enough feedback, posters on this forum can adjust their behaviors in line with said feedback, which would be in the wider interest of all.

Trolls are not "spirited posters" and your assessment of Sam is complete bs.

 

[(Q)]

The problem should have been handled a long time ago. But it wasn't.

Exactly, you admins and mods brought all this on yourself, T. You didn't handle the problem. Instead, you banned and badgered everyone else for "attacking" Sam.

Blind fools, the lot of you.