The most absurd moderation in Sci history

[James R]

Why should I bother, if you can simply remove it, relevant in my opinion or not?

I can remove any or all of your posts.

Why bother posting anything on this forum at all?

Note that as a matter of fact I have not removed anything you have written here. I have simply split the off-topic material posted in the current thread to a separate thread, where the flow of the discussion is much clearer and easier to follow.

Moreover, despite her protestations that she has been through all this before with you, SAM apparently wants to go over the old ground with you again - and so do you.

 

[S.A.M.]

That's for other other thread, SAM.



No. Science is the part where you have a hypothesis and you go out and find the evidence for and against it.

I'm presenting a scenario which you claim is a frequent occurrence on the forum. Personally, I think mods should be objective and not take sides in a discussion unless they are posting as regular posters.

For a moderator to take a side in a debate as a moderator, demand evidence from one side without offering any argument and use his power to remove one side of a debate is an abuse of moderator power - its also bias. To set timers and enact countdowns is just childish and immature.

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

SAM:

You think the Holocaust is irrelevant in "the East"?

I think it's an object lesson for all people on the planet. It is a pity that so many people are ignorant and that there have since been similar repeats of such atrocities.

She is right about that James. I have had to purchase a book about Anne Frank for a young Khmer girl who happens to attend an international school here because he had never heard of the holocaust. I almost lost it one night when a Khmer (because of the ECCC tribunals) was under the impression that the autogenocide in Cambodia was the worst atrocity in human history. He too had never heard of a 'jew' nor of a holocaust. There are Asians I have met across the board who have a vague idea of what the holocaust was but couldn't give you any meaningful details because it is wrapped up in European history of which is not central to the education systems unless it also includes them. So there is no surprise that the role of the Japanese play a larger role in their memory than what went on on the ground in Europe itself. I have on more than one occasion given a small history of genocide outside asia which would include what happened in Rwanda, also something that most here have no idea occurred. The holocaust plays a larger role in the West than it does in the East. I don't think Sam was suggesting that 'they don't care' as much as there are historical lessons closer to home that they rely upon.

 

[S.A.M.]

The first time I saw someone banned for antisemitism on this board [I think it was Roman], I looked up the term. Thats how irrelevant the holocaust is outside the west [and I consider myself a fairly well educated, well read person]

Its only because I spent the last four years in the US that I have any idea how manic obsessive the west is about Jews and the Holocaust. I spent a lifetime before that hearing the word only two or three times in my life. Once, because a sisters friend was Jewish, once, because my swimming instructor was and once because an Indian I know was going around with a Jewish guy in Montreal. I can actually count the number of times I heard the word.

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

The first time I saw someone banned for antisemitism on this board [I think it was Roman], I looked up the term. Thats how irrelevant the holocaust is outside the west [and I consider myself a fairly well educated, well read person]

Its only because I spent the last four years in the US that I have any idea how manic obsessive the west is about Jews and the Holocaust. I spent a lifetime before that hearing the word only two or three times in my life. Once, because a sisters friend was Jewish, once, because my swimming instructor was and once because an Indian I know was going around with a Jewish guy in Montreal. I can actually count the number of times I heard the word.

That's very difficult for many in the West to fathom but after living in Asia as long as I have I know that it is quite common.

 

[parmalee]

Originally Posted by WillNever
Sandy was an obvious yard-trash candidate, as is (or should be) Baron Max, joepistole, buffalo roam, draqon, john99 and a few other politically caricatured, undynamic persona non gratae who have been largely shunned by the few of us more intellectual posters who ignore the static lot entirely.

one can always count on WillNever for the lolz.

joepistole?! i can see how one might include him simply by a cursory reading of a few of his thread titles, but are you sure that you are actually reading his posts?

funnily, i would include you and your cohort, Norsefire, alongside Sandy, Buffalo Roam, et al, as some of the most predictable caricatures. in fact, even with my paltry programming skills, i'm confident that i could conjure up a pretty savvy "automatic WillNever response generator."

and Norse, when cornered, invariably responds with something not unlike this:

"for i am pure, noble, and moral, and you are a pathetic, communist, leftwing, zionist scumbag (leftwing zionist, eh?)."

i have yet to see Norse substantiate any claim he has ever made.

but please do expound upon how you personally have elevated the level of discourse on this forum.

and, for fuck's sake, if you respond to this, please do not include any "nays" (you're not a horsey, are ya?) and do not pretend that you have never met me, like you did with Quadrophonics a few pages back, for the umpteenth time i might add. and, try to keep your characteristic deflection to a tolerable minimum.

If you think Norse contributes nothing intellectual to this site, then that shows how well you don't know him. Check out of most his thread creations in recent times. To many, they are intellectually stimulating.

yeah, this one: [url="http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=103356]why do people just not care about being moral and righteous?[/url]. very stimulating indeed.

 

[Gustav]

heh
i was gonna put your name in that members missed thread
good to see you parm

 

[parmalee]

you know, i was gonna post this, but unfortunately Will deleted the recent photo from the pictures thread--did you happen to catch that?

anyhows, while i've got a touch of the prosopagnosia (epilepsy and whatnots), Will seemed to bear a striking resemblance to that Hillyer fella, whose photo is in the sf family album! funny that.

 

[WillNever]

That sounds like something a 20 year old would say.

I don't think so. It sounds to me more like something many people who are older than that, but not yet 40 (like myself) would say.

Truth be told, many 40 year olds think of themselves as "old."

you know, i was gonna post this, but unfortunately Will deleted the recent photo from the pictures thread--did you happen to catch that?

That were deleted about a week you ago, if you paid any attention at all. I rarely leave IRL pictures up for any lengthy period of time. However, I'm familiar with "Hillyers" picture. His hair was blonde. Mine is brown. His face is round. Mine is angular. No resemblance exists, except the one you are trying to make up because you bear a residual grudge against me from our last run-in. As well... if I were Hillyer, and trying to avoid being mixed up with him... why would I post IRL pictures of myself at all? You do have a brain, right? Try using it. The Hillyer thing was discredited a while back. I narrowed it down to either Gustav or you, parmalee, as secretly having been Hillyer.

However, it is thanks to people such as yourself that many users were timid about posting in that picture thread, such as crista. People are asked to self-disclose a little personal information about themselves, so they do it... and within a week, one exploitative, no-life asshole tries to take advantage of that knowledge. Try growing up, if you can.

 

[Bells]

Now imagine in this discussion, a mod jumps in takes a side, demands evidence, sets a timer and threatens a ban. Is this science?

We all ask for substantiating evidence. I wanted him to back up his claims. It was anti-semitic and frankly, saying that it is not because he is Syrian doesn't cut it with me.

I stand by my actions Sam. If you don't like it or disagree with that, then you can PM Plazma and tell him. Or report me to the other admins in this forum.

In some stricter science forums, Norse would have been permanently banned without any warnings for anti-semitism. Refusing to provide any evidence to his claims would have resulted in a perma-ban.

There is this inherent belief that we are somehow more social. This is not a social networking site. You can't post whatever you want on this site. And if you post something, then you have to be able to back it up. We all know that. In my opinion, Norse was anti-semitic in his comments. Blaming the Jews for the holocaust would be akin to my blaming the Indians for their mass slaughter at the hands of the British because they were Indian. That is hate speech.

I gave him more leeway and was accused of being anti-semitic in doing so. But I wanted to know where his views were coming from. But apparently because he is a Syrian living in Texas with white supremacist views, I should somehow understand his point of view? No. It does not work that way.

 

[iceaura]

Please take discussion of disease in North America to a different thread. It is off-topic here.
”
Why should I bother, if you can simply remove it, relevant in my opinion or not?

Moderator note: off-topic discussion moved to other thread about disease in North America

That one was not off topic here. It is off topic there - but it worked out OK, through casual repurposing and derangement of the topic over there.

That doesn't illustrate SAM's point exactly - which seems pointed in abstract, and off target in particular - but it's as close as need be; which makes it on topic here, in its absence? Muddle Accomplished.

 

[parmalee]

That were deleted about a week you ago, if you paid any attention at all. I rarely leave IRL pictures up for any lengthy period of time. However, I'm familiar with "Hillyers" picture. His hair was blonde. Mine is brown. His face is round. Mine is angular. No resemblance exists, except the one you are trying to make up because you bear a residual grudge against me from our last run-in. As well... if I were Hillyer, and trying to avoid being mixed up with him... why would I post IRL pictures of myself at all? You do have a brain, right? Try using it. The Hillyer thing was discredited a while back. I narrowed it down to either Gustav or you, parmalee, as secretly having been Hillyer.

that were? what's with all these "were"s when you mean "was"? i's onto your games, Willy!

and me, Hillyer? if you look around a bit, you'll find a photo of me on this forum and it is quite plain that i am not Hillyer.

anyways, why not repost and let the readers decide?

 

[WillNever]

You may call me WillNever and nothing else.

 

[parmalee]

not even buffy?

 

[WillNever]

anyways, why not repost and let the readers decide?

I have no need for such. My identity wasn't in question for anybody who posted in that thread, nor was it connected to the defunct poster that you have a hard-on for in any way whatsoever. Therefore, I have nothing to prove. I did receive compliments on my picture, though, so I thank people for that.

not even buffy?

That's right. See ya around, Hillyer.

 

[S.A.M.]

We all ask for substantiating evidence. I wanted him to back up his claims. It was anti-semitic and frankly, saying that it is not because he is Syrian doesn't cut it with me.

I stand by my actions Sam. If you don't like it or disagree with that, then you can PM Plazma and tell him. Or report me to the other admins in this forum.

In some stricter science forums, Norse would have been permanently banned without any warnings for anti-semitism. Refusing to provide any evidence to his claims would have resulted in a perma-ban.

There is this inherent belief that we are somehow more social. This is not a social networking site. You can't post whatever you want on this site. And if you post something, then you have to be able to back it up. We all know that. In my opinion, Norse was anti-semitic in his comments. Blaming the Jews for the holocaust would be akin to my blaming the Indians for their mass slaughter at the hands of the British because they were Indian. That is hate speech.

I gave him more leeway and was accused of being anti-semitic in doing so. But I wanted to know where his views were coming from. But apparently because he is a Syrian living in Texas with white supremacist views, I should somehow understand his point of view? No. It does not work that way.

In other words you see nothing wrong with mods jumping into a discussion, taking one side and banning the other, without presenting any argument themselves. Moreover, you stand by these actions and will repeat them as necessary. Since one cannot predict with any certainty which "side" the mods will take in any debate [as one will only "learn" this through a ban], don't be surprised if you get exactly what you aim for.

Meanwhile, this is what Norse actually said, for which he was instantly banned [ie without any question or argument]

And Jews sabotaged Europe, manipulate world banks, and created the conditions necessary for both World Wars.

Is this the same as blaming the Jews for the holocaust?

A comparable to Indian history would be, Indians created the conditions which enabled British colonialism to take root in their country and what do you know, its actually true!

I have no desire to take this to Plazma or James.

I merely want to state here quite unequivocally that it is unethical to abuse moderator power to direct a debate on a forum based merely on the perspective of the moderator. Its unethical to stifle debate because you find it personally offensive based on arbitrary and subjective standards. Its unethical to ban opinion on a science forum without presenting evidence to refute and its definitely unethical to call this kind of debating tactic as scientific. As someone who has actually worked in science, I guarantee you, such tactics would be laughed out of a conference. Any moderator who kicks out a debator because he doesn't like what he says will never be asked to moderate a scientific meeting a second time. Science is about allowing all sides to present their views without restriction and allowing people to make up their own mind depending on where the evidence leads. Opinion has no part in it.

 

[parmalee]

I have no need for such. My identity wasn't in question for anybody who posted in that thread, nor was it connected to the defunct poster that you have a hard-on for in any way whatsoever. Therefore, I have nothing to prove. I did receive compliments on my picture, though, so I thank people for that.

have i ever mentioned Hillyer prior? (no.) i wasn't even around way back when.

i only mention such now because i'm somewhat curious about the insistence by some, and your insistent denial. and, of course, i saw a resemblance.

 

[WillNever]

The insistence by "some" consisted of two people: Gustav and Stryder. Stryder because he got mad when I complained against some moderator action from way back (mods have a tendency to conflate everyone who disagrees with them into a single archetype in order to cope) and Gustav, who is probably Hillyer.

your insistent denial.

Uh.. what is one supposed to do to dispel a rumor? Admit it instead of deny it?

Now, if you don't know what you are talking about, but feel compelled to "mention" it anyhow, then your intentions are probably malicious. Reputation damage against someone you decided to dislike, maybe? In any event, if you look at Lord Hillyer's post history, then the person who acts and posts most similarly to him (prolific thread starting, snappy one liners) and in the same sections of the board (site feedback, about the members, cesspool) continues to be gustav. Just go back a couple of pages in each of their histories and see for yourself. You bear some similarities as well, however.

 

[S.A.M.]

have i ever mentioned Hillyer prior? (no.) i wasn't even around way back when.

i only mention such now because i'm somewhat curious about the insistence by some, and your insistent denial. and, of course, i saw a resemblance.

I'm not sure if you are kidding or not, but I have seen both of them and I don't see a resemblance except superficially, in colouring. Hillyer had a very square jaw and wide grey eyes, while Willnever has a long face and his eyes are blue and much smaller than Hillyers

Where is your pic? I haven't seen it

 

[parmalee]

I'm not sure if you are kidding or not, but I have seen both of them and I don't see a resemblance except superficially, in colouring. Hillyer had a very square jaw and wide grey eyes, while Willnever has a long face and his eyes are blue and much smaller than Hillyers

really? well, like i said, i've got a bit of the face-blindness.

anyhow, i've got a typical jew-face (though i'm but a paternal half-jew), so gentile folk all look kinda similar to me.

Where is your pic? I haven't seen it

i'll PM you. it's in a thread, but i'd rather not link it as i kind of regret having posted it--but i'm not in the habit of un-doing anything, as i like to pretend that i have no regrets.