Mods Gone Wild

[Neverfly]

Oh I already know what I do. And if you simply read my posts you will know it too. I don't make a secret of it.

I admit that I have read very few of your posts and have very little to go on.

But my advice serves well, regardless.

Listen, I am here primarily because I'm banned from BAUT.

Part of that is because of my own behavior. Part of it is because of something very not right that occurred, that I spoke out against strongly. The mods were just as wrong as I was.
In the end, it was partly due to my attitude and behavior that I was banned. An irony, since I was tolerated for a very long time in spite of that behavior because when I'm on good behavior I can actually be pretty ok.

I do not resent being banned, now. Simply because BAUT is too oppressive for me. It tried to make me into something I'm not and I'm ashamed that I even allowed it to do that.

But it did at least give me that experience. Sometimes a person is not aware of their own behavior. It takes others to grab their heads and make them look at times.

Even if you think you're behavior is great, you can still look at yourself critically for improvement. It couldn't Hurt, right?

 

[S.A.M.]

Thanks, I know what you mean and I know you mean well.

Lets just say when you have a choice between being right and being acceptable, I would rather stick with my principles than public relations. And I'm not a hard person to get along with because I never hold peoples opinions against them but I am absolutely immovable when I am asked to abandon ethics in favour of political correctness.

The banning is inevitable, because James will work very very hard to make it happen. So I have kind of accepted it will happen. I would fight it, but I cannot abide arguments when dishonesty becomes part of the argument I am supposed to counter. In which case it just becomes an exercise in mud slinging and is not worth getting dirty for.

And believe me when I say, I am a fighter.

 

[Neverfly]

Thanks, I know what you mean and I know you mean well.

Lets just say when you have a choice between being right and being acceptable, I would rather stick with my principles than public relations. And I'm not a hard person to get along with because I never hold peoples opinions against them but I am absolutely immovable when I am asked to abandon ethics in favour of political correctness.

The banning is inevitable, because James will work very very hard to make it happen. So I have kind of accepted it will happen. I would fight it, but I cannot abide arguments when dishonesty becomes part of the argument I am supposed to counter. In which case it just becomes an exercise in mud slinging and is not worth getting dirty for.

And believe me when I say, I am a fighter.

I will have to observe your posts for a while... so don't get banned too quickly.

I understand fighting against oppression and unfairness tooth and nail.
If I Observe first hand that you are being treated unfairly, Know that I WILL stand up right beside you.

However, so far my observation of your posts have revealed several bias' on your part and unnecessary commentary.

Having the audacity to say whatever you think in a moment is not the same as being right or correct.

 

[S.A.M.]

I will have to observe your posts for a while... so don't get banned too quickly.

I understand fighting against oppression and unfairness tooth and nail.
If I Observe first hand that you are being treated unfairly, Know that I WILL stand up right beside you.

However, so far my observation of your posts have revealed several bias' on your part and unnecessary commentary.

Having the audacity to say whatever you think in a moment is not the same as being right or correct.

Oh yes, there is definitely a bias in my post. I only post from a liberal, Muslim point of view. And I happen to be one of those people who do not consider tolerance synonymous with liberalism. What the last four years at sciforums have shown me, is that there is a strange tendency among "secular humanists" to think that if they are liberals they are tolerant. Liberalism is a bias and is intolerant of conversatism [with a small c] as much as conservatism is intolerant of liberalism. Tolerance itself is an entirely different animal and I have fought, sometimes successfully for those who oppose my POV to have a voice here.

We have had a discussion where James has accused me of posting only from the liberal POV, which I unashamedly accepted. I do not pretend to stand in the middle - I take a stance. And I am not ashamed of it. That also scores against me, I think. You can take a look at this thread for some expansion on my POV. Or even this one here.

Or I could just give you an example. Pick ANY thread about ANY "Muslim issue". Regardless of what the issue is, it quickly becomes all about a generic Muslim and every single country where a Muslim may be found will be quickly brought in. I could complain about it, but nothing will come of it. So I will simply emulate it. And bring in some other country with an issue similar to the one being discussed. And as you see, not only will I get warned for it, but the post and subsequent discussion will be split off and cesspooled. So I will be proved right, if only by proxy. But still GeoffP will never get pulled up for it even once, while I will get pulled up for it every single time. Is that a bias?

As for the commentary, yes, I will plead guilty. I do vent a lot.

 

[S.A.M.]

Anyway, I'm quitting this thread now. I had given up on it but I realised that WillNever's issue which is correct had suddenly become about attacking WillNever, rather than addressing the issue. It is a common tactic here, to attack the beliefs and style of the poster rather than address his arguments.

 

[GeoffP]

And bring in some other country with an issue similar to the one being discussed. And as you see, not only will I get warned for it, but the post and subsequent discussion will be split off and cesspooled. So I will be proved right, if only by proxy. But still GeoffP will never get pulled up for it even once, while I will get pulled up for it every single time. Is that a bias?

I won't? Sam, when you make it an issue of religion, or of belief, or demography, is it unfair to apply examples from the very world you're talking about? I think I've been pretty fair - more than fair - in our discussions, and I think the examples I've posted have been relevant. I deal honestly with you, every time. But if you have any specific threads or debates you'd like to touch on, I'd be more than happy to discuss them in any length. If I've been unfair, I want to know.

Before you insinuate unfair dealing, perhaps I should remind you that I was the one to stop at least one of your bans, because I felt the standard applied therein was unfair to you.

 

[Pinwheel]

 

[James R]

Unbelievable really, you can't even be sarcastic about a topicless thread anymore.

The thread was not topicless. It had a very clear topic: the Armenian genocide. That has NOTHING to do with Israel and Palestine, and you know it.

We have had a discussion where James has accused me of posting only from the liberal POV, which I unashamedly accepted.

I'm not sure where this "accusation" is supposed to have occurred. I'm also not sure whether you're using the term "liberal" in the American sense of the opposite of the conservative Republicans, or in the classical sense. As far as I'm aware, you're not "liberal" in the same way that, say, Norsefire would describe himself as "liberal".

Why I would "accuse" somebody of being "liberal", as if that was a bad thing, is a bit of a mystery. But do carry on with your persecution complex.

 

[Captain Kremmen]

Listen, I am here primarily because I'm banned from BAUT.

.... and you won't last too long on here either.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

.... and you won't last too long on here either.

Welcom to Sciforms Neverfly :splat:

 

[Neverfly]

.... and you won't last too long on here either.

Time will tell.

I imagine you must know me from BAUT under a different user name. Because to have built up an opinion of me that quickly would be absurd if it was based only on here.

Welcom to Sciforms Neverfly :splat:

Thank you


In Captain Kremmen's defense, (Although my first instinct is that he deserves little for being such an ass.) I can be a real pain in the butt at times. You haven't seen it yet, but any browser with enough time on their hands can read my posts over there...

 

[StrawDog]

I believe I did address your post. And I do not believe my comments were disparaging.


They were quite honest observations. Those who stand fast by him and allow him to speak on their behalf are sycophants, in my opinion. He posted in the group that he wanted all members to rush to this thread and voice their discontent and sure enough, in you rushed.

Respectfully Bells, lets revisit "in you rushed".

“ Originally Posted by WillNever
Official Statement from Sciforums High Society:

Due to the observed unfair moderation practices of James R and other forum-fatigued moderators who are allowing their jaded, cynical, and prejudicial expectations of users of the board to dictate their acts of moderation, High Society group is making an official statement of depreciation and contempt for ALL perpetrators of this low-down, scumsucking behavior on the part of the moderators. We see this kind of innately and purposefully unfair moderation as a serious violation of ethical values and that sort of thing is simply not acceptable in our eyes, and therefore we officially disapprove of it. We consider anyone who sits by while users are alienated in this way to be UNPRINCIPLED if they do not decry these acts in a large, bold voice. Bullying users of your board is wrong, regardless of whatever you think of their viewpoints.”

“ Originally Posted by StrawDog -Seconded. This used to be a Board for FREE, Creative and Objective discourse, and these ideals should be upheld." - "If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all." - Noam Chomsky

I absolutely concur with Will regarding his statement. I, as a supporter of Palestinian rights and a strong critic of US foreign policy, have been a victim of James R and other moderators flexible and gratuitous ire, and bullying (around what is considered appropriate evidential material) as Will describes, thus I concur. Note my additional comment around free thinking.

Note the events of the last few days. Anyone who does not agree with him or is not happy that he represented the group were removed if they did not leave of their own volition.

Fair enough, and less than appropriate behavior from Will.

And I would strongly suggest that you view the behaviour of your fearless leader in this and other threads and explain to me how and why you are defending him.

Defended, for reasons explained above.

Tell me, does he speak for the group when he makes such comments? Note the original comment before he edited it:

I utterly disagree with and am saddened by the sentiment and manner of this statement. Kira certainly does not deserve this manner of treatment. :m:

I am surprised that you are not telling him that such racism and such bigotry is not an ideal espoused by any "High Society" of supposed intelligent free thinkers.

He does certainly not speak for me. This response is clearly bigoted and racist. I condemn this outright.

Believe me when I say that I was being kind when I used the term sycophant, especially in light of how he has just spoken to Kira.

Within the context provided, I agree with, and understand your outrage Bells. Thanks for pointing this out.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

Thank you

I can be a real pain in the butt at times.

You soun like my cup-O-tea... feel free to speek you'r mind to me as much as you dare in the groops (or in PM)... i dont use the "report" button.!!!


A-Man.TTT

 

[Bells]

I absolutely concur with Will regarding his statement. I, as a supporter of Palestinian rights and a strong critic of US foreign policy, have been a victim of James R and other moderators flexible and gratuitous ire, and bullying (around what is considered appropriate evidential material) as Will describes, thus I concur. Note my additional comment around free thinking.

And I, as a strong supporter of the Palestinians and a very strong critic of US foreign policy, not just in regards to Israel and the Palestinians, but also in regards to the war and with issues such as their lack of actions in Rwanda, for example, have never been subject to what you are claiming. Which is strange in and of itself, don't you think?

You are accusing James of bigotry because he is apparently targetting anyone who takes an anti-Israel stance or anti-US stance. I do take such a stance and was never 'targetted' by James. James takes such a stance as well. In case you are not aware, he is on the side of the Palestinians and has voiced such opinions repeatedly on this forum.

I don't recall Challenger, as one example who also had the same stance, ever being targetted either and he is a Muslim. Nor were other Muslim members of this forum who have since stopped posting for one reason or another, none of which I am sure of, was because of bullying by James or the other moderators. If we are to fully believe that James and some of the other moderators are bigots and will sanction or bully anyone who holds such a stance as I do, I'd have been banned from this forum a long time ago. I would have received warning after warning and been removed from this forum. The same, I imagine, would have happened to anyone else who had the same belief as I do, be they Muslim or not. And yet, we have Muslim and non-Muslim members who have the same beliefs and the same criticism who are left completely untouched. One was even made a moderator recently.

So what does that tell you? Could it be the manner of delivery perhaps?

Fair enough, and less than appropriate behavior from Will.

Yes.

Defended, for reasons explained above.

And read my explanation above.

I utterly disagree with and am saddened by the sentiment and manner of this statement. Kira certainly does not deserve this manner of treatment.

You seem surprised that he even said it? Had you read some of his other posts on this forum, you would not have been so surprised.

Kira is the absolute last person on this forum who deserved that kind of comment from Will. He was not only rude to her, but racist and bigotted towards her. Personally, I think he should have been banned outright for it.

He does certainly not speak for me. This response is clearly bigoted and racist. I condemn this outright.

Yes it is.

 

[Captain Kremmen]

Time will tell.

I imagine you must know me from BAUT under a different user name. Because to have built up an opinion of me that quickly would be absurd if it was based only on here.

No, it's not absurd.
You were banned from one site for being bothersome, and you came to this site.
Now, oddly enough, you have a problem with this site too.

You've only been on here ten minutes. Why not just post your stuff, sit back for a while, and don't rush to pre-judgement.

There's not a lot wrong with this site.

You claim to have solutions/opinions/God knows what to the problems which this site has, and yet you are not even familiar with SAM's posts.
You don't know what you are talking about.

One problem the site has is that some of our most intelligent and eloquent posters also frequently break the ground rules of the site.
People push the limits. It's probably a sign of success.

Do the moderators allow one rule for some members and a different set of rules for the rest, or do they try to moderate.

Do they try to restrain the most energetic members, or kick them out?
Or do they let them behave as they please, and only moderate newer or less valued members?

If you think you can improve on this site, why not start your own.
You'll probably see the difficulties then.

 

[S.A.M.]

Bells, are you married to James? Its the only explanation for your strange support of his actions.

 

[Bells]

Bells, are you married to James? Its the only explanation for your strange support of his actions.

Is this meant to be a retarded question? Or are you actually being serious?

Are you going to ask that of all other members who "support" him?

Am I married to James? Well unless my husband has been moonlighting on this forum before I even met him, then I guess the answer is no.

Can you explain to me why I and Muslim and non-Muslim members who have taken the exact same stance when it comes to the Palestinians, have not been sanctioned by him or any of the other moderators?

As I pointed out before, could it be in the method of your delivery that is the issue?

 

[S.A.M.]

Like I said, I don't know why and if you're not married to him, then your own position is equally bizarre.

 

[Captain Kremmen]

You are being very traditional, SAM.
Not everyone gets married these days you know.

 

[S.A.M.]

Thats true. But its harder to avoid people you're married to.

Believe me, I know.