ISF/JREF Moderation

ISF/JREF Moderation

Postby Kaosium » Sun Dec 12, 2010 5:29 pm

I have been posting in support of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito on the Amanda Knox thread at the James Randi Educational Forum for a few months now. I just got suspended for two weeks and was wondering if someone here who also posts here could tell me what I did. I got some odd warnings when I logged on, I had misspelled a posters name when giving him a compliment and it came out shitlt instead of shutlt, it wasn't even intentional! The other one was a post that said 'Do you think we didn't know? :)' which strikes me as a pretty innocuous post. I can't see anything today that broke any rules, it was all on-topic (one was subtle but on topic) and not aggressive at all.

I know some here post there and I was wondering if they could tell me what happened. I can't help but wonder if it has anything to do with the fact Fulcanelli started posting again the same day.
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
User avatar
Kaosium
Moderator
 
Posts: 838
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:39 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Chris C » Mon Dec 13, 2010 12:58 am

All i can say is send a message to the person that banned you. Sometimes they ban people on very minor offense on that thread, when they ban people for major offenses. I'm betting you wasn't the only person that got banned.
Chris C
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 4:05 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Dan O. » Mon Dec 13, 2010 2:17 am

That thread has been on a very short leash for a long time since before you joined. I couldn't see anything in your recent posts that would account for the suspension either.

There is a section in Forum Management for filing appeals. Keep in mind that only JREF administrators can implement a suspension or ban. They take a neutral position on the issue of the thread though the newest admin LashL was leaning towards innocence when she was posting. She is a real lawyer so has a real life and dealing with misbehaving children on the board takes away from her enjoyment time.

Did any of your posts that were moved to AAH receive yellow cards? Were any of your recent posts deleted?

There were two or three suspensions and one banning in this latest round and nothing has been posted in the public notices. This is unusual so I suspect LashL just doesn't have time to deal with it now or something very sinister has happened.


ETA: seeing how you only got a light two week suspension, it's probably the snarky post you made after Tricky's warning about having to move a number of posts to AAH. It looks like everybody that had a post moved at that time (other than for quoting a post that was moved) got the same suspension. I don't thing you will be able to successfully fight this one. An admission of guilt and apology might get you a reduced sentence or at least shouldn't hurt.
... and remember that you can never assume that you are completely anonymous or that you cannot be identified by your online comments. -- (from the ISF membership agreement)
Dan O.
 
Posts: 1059
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 12:57 am
Location: Home is where I hug my cat

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Kaosium » Mon Dec 13, 2010 6:16 am

I had one edited and then moved, I then had another one moved. The first one was because I mistyped Shuttlt or whatever as Shitlt. It was an error as the context was a compliment. No yellow cards, and it was Darat who sent me the message I'd been suspended hours later. I replied asking 'what did I do?

It's one thing if you break the rules or try to bend them and get caught, it's quite another when you have no idea what you might have done. This is my first post after Tricky's warning, I don't see any snark, I was trying to be nice to her. I know how to snark, but there was no attempt on my part here that I can see.
:(


Originally Posted by Solange305 View Post
I know Im playing "armchair witness" or "armchair potential murderer" here, but I cannot imagine seeing both an open front door, and blood on a bathmat and sink, and NOT being more suspicious and afraid. I don't know a single woman who would leave a mess like that of menstrual blood, especially living with other roommates who bring boyfriends home. I don't know how dark it was in the bathroom, Im not sure if she saw the footprint before she took a shower or what, but again, it makes be suspicious.



Fair enough, though I am often less observant--I might not even have noticed. If I did I would guess someone had an accident or something and went out to get something, murder is a pretty rare event, that might not even have occurred to me.
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
User avatar
Kaosium
Moderator
 
Posts: 838
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:39 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Dan O. » Mon Dec 13, 2010 10:03 am

The delayed response is because the Moderators move the posts but only an admin can impose a suspension.


I think it was the post where you said:

Did you honestly think we didn't know. :)


It's a very weak snark but to avoid putting the thread back on moderated status which is no fun for the Mods, they are taking a zero tolerance approach.
... and remember that you can never assume that you are completely anonymous or that you cannot be identified by your online comments. -- (from the ISF membership agreement)
Dan O.
 
Posts: 1059
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 12:57 am
Location: Home is where I hug my cat

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Sarah » Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:19 am

What's the difference between suspension and banned? Can people who are banned really never post again?

Two weeks is really severe for such minor things. One week would have been more reasonable.
User avatar
Sarah
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3542
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 11:23 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Dan O. » Tue Dec 14, 2010 4:58 pm

People that get banned loose all access (as a member) except the ability to start an appeal. They have no expectation to ever be reinstated. Suspension is only for a limited duration and you automatically get reinstated when your sentence expires. After a suspension you are presumed to be on probation for an unspecified time where subsequent infractions can earn you an extended sentence.

Normally, first time suspensions for a minor infraction only receive 1 or 2 days. Posting in the Amanda Knox thread is treated specially because of the history of the thread.


I may be joining Kaosium on the sidelines after slipping up last night and making a post a little too personal. If so, I'll use the opportunity to work on the wiki.

Kaosium, do you have the wiki address?
... and remember that you can never assume that you are completely anonymous or that you cannot be identified by your online comments. -- (from the ISF membership agreement)
Dan O.
 
Posts: 1059
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 12:57 am
Location: Home is where I hug my cat

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Kaosium » Thu Dec 16, 2010 8:32 pm

No I don't have the wiki address, I've seen you refer to it but as I recall you keep it a secret for obvious reasons.
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
User avatar
Kaosium
Moderator
 
Posts: 838
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:39 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Justinian » Thu Dec 16, 2010 9:01 pm

1) I think some of the moderators have biases.
2) Some of the guilters can post a hundred garbage posts before getting suspended while one of the non-guilters can make one bad post and be suspended. It happened to me once. The moderator left a message that any further rule transgressions would be dealt with harshly. I didn't see his warning, made one retaliatory post and was banned for two weeks.
3) A lot of it is timing.

Hope to see you back soon.
Is it ignorance or apathy? Hey, I don’t know and I don’t care. -- Jimmy Buffett
Anti-intellectualism is plausibly anger against those that undermine ones' biases.
User avatar
Justinian
 
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:51 am
Location: European American

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Kaosium » Thu Dec 16, 2010 10:23 pm

It will be the 26th, I had my terminology wrong, I was 'suspended.' I think maybe I reached my 'snark' quota, and it was my 'turn.' Something like that, lord knows I was not perfect there, I just tried real hard to be careful once I was 'warned.' At any rate, no matter, I've made myself comfortable with it.

In a bizarre turn I decided to register at PMF to see if I could just discuss some peripherals with them, I lasted about ten posts knowing I was walking through a minefield and trying to be extra careful, but Skeptical Bystander was instantly 'suspicious' and I was told to take a 48 hour break, and then someone dug up an old post I wrote shortly after I became interested in this on a board far, far away trying to figure out just why people would act like they were then and I was instantly 'banned' from there for 48 years. LOL!

I thought maybe the culture over there had changed a little, I guessed wrong! :P
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
User avatar
Kaosium
Moderator
 
Posts: 838
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:39 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Withnail1969 » Fri Dec 17, 2010 7:27 am

i noticed your PMF career was somewhat brief. it's hilarious that they even paint themselves as a 'discussion forum'. They talk about rabbits all the time because most topics to do with the case are strictly off-limits.
User avatar
Withnail1969
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:12 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Time » Fri Dec 17, 2010 6:09 pm

I think we can all agree that PMF is not a forum but a multi-author blog disguised as a forum. Any definition of "forum" alludes to open discussion whereas the fascist moderation at PMF precludes openness in any form. Discussion is purposely silenced in order to maintain the PMF stance - "guilt by opinion".

For now their frail voice is protected by The First Amendment, lest they cross-over the thin line towards hate speech. Only time will tell...

/Time
Time
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 5:05 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Kaosium » Fri Dec 17, 2010 10:56 pm

It's not a forum it's a case study in the effects of group polarization.
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
User avatar
Kaosium
Moderator
 
Posts: 838
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:39 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Withnail1969 » Sat Dec 18, 2010 3:37 am

Kaosium wrote:It's not a forum it's a case study in the effects of group polarization.


Solange even has the cheek to say that the JREF crowd 'refuse' to post on PMF. Perhaps she doesn't know that literally all of us have been banned there. IIRC I myself was banned in less than 40 posts for suggesting there might be a problem with the DNA knife evidence.
User avatar
Withnail1969
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:12 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Kaosium » Sat Dec 18, 2010 4:29 am

Solange sent me a private message I'll never be able to read now. I wonder what it said?

I don't feel as bad knowing others had tried to talk to them there. I found out afterward that more people than I realized had created accounts there. However, I also notice almost a 100% correlation between the ones I was told--or knew--had accounts there and the ones who get 'special treatment' from them. I guess once I get out of the docks it will be my turn in the barrel. Oh, well. I can stand the heat, I've been to Hell's Kitchen... :)
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
User avatar
Kaosium
Moderator
 
Posts: 838
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:39 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Time » Sat Dec 18, 2010 5:24 am

Kaosium wrote:I don't feel as bad knowing others had tried to talk to them there.

Keep your chin up Kaosium, remember that in December 2058 you'll be able to post there again!
:P

/Time
Time
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 5:05 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Kaosium » Sat Dec 18, 2010 5:52 am

Oh, I don't feel bad about getting banned there, I figured it was a decent probability. I was just afraid some who agree with me on their innocence might look at me akin to the way rational people would if I'd gone to a meeting of the Flat Earth Society and not been there just to say: 'You're all a bunch of KOOKS!' :)
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
User avatar
Kaosium
Moderator
 
Posts: 838
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:39 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Chris C » Sat Dec 18, 2010 8:34 am

Time wrote:
Kaosium wrote:I don't feel as bad knowing others had tried to talk to them there.

Keep your chin up Kaosium, remember that in December 2058 you'll be able to post there again!
:P

/Time

Doesn't matter. World gonna end in December 2012. :) Then again, Al Gore also thinks that if the ice in the arctic ocean melts it will flood the coastline.
Chris C
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 4:05 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Withnail1969 » Sun Dec 19, 2010 7:16 am

LOL I'm suspended from JREF for a month for calling SomeAlibi a 'scary psychotic individual'.

I stand by what i said but a month seems a little extreme. Note to Self - stop drinking beer while on the internet!
User avatar
Withnail1969
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:12 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Time » Sun Dec 19, 2010 10:45 am

Considering the amount of time it takes to get banned over there is heavily correlated to your IQ, you should be rather happy that you passed the test, twice even!
(Although Kaosium wins overall :-)

Having a low IQ is nothing to be ashamed of, of course, so may they circle jerk in peace, poor lads!
/Time
Time
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 5:05 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Withnail1969 » Mon Dec 20, 2010 11:35 am

LOL, if you don't know already, Fulcanelli/Michael has been banned from JREF.
User avatar
Withnail1969
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:12 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Kaosium » Mon Dec 20, 2010 4:26 pm

What did he do? Did he melt down and someone deleted it before I saw it? Or was it for past indiscretions and he was on such a short leash he couldn't waver the slightest bit from the straight and narrow? I didn't see anything he posted that deserved the death sentence.

BTW, Withnail, when they were talking about WWII, before you got suspended, I wondered why you didn't chime in with the Battle of Britain as the turning point. Midway was a brilliant victory for the US, and turned the tide in the Pacific, but by the end of that war we were churning out carriers faster than we could name them, thus it only accelerated the inevitable. Pearl Harbor was critical mainly because Hitler kept his pledge to the Japanese and declared on the US; had he not, it's not definite that the US would have declared on Germany, what with a war on the other coast to fight. My own feeling is it was Stalingrad because it broke the back of the Wehrmacht, but had Britain succumbed in '40 it would have been an entirely different war. Barbarossa may have succeeded and if the US had ever gotten involved, an amphibious landing crossing the entire Atlantic is a much more difficult--perhaps nigh impossible--undertaking than merely crossing the channel.
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
User avatar
Kaosium
Moderator
 
Posts: 838
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:39 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby bobc » Mon Dec 20, 2010 4:50 pm

It's hard to post at JREF and not get suspended/banned, it seems :?

Going OT, I'm not quite sure how we define "turning point", but certainly those events you mentioned were a reversal of fortune for Hitler.

In terms of actions that inevitably led to defeat for the Nazis, perhaps one of the worst was the decision to break his deal with Stalin and attack the Soviet Union. Even after failure to win the Battle of Britain, Hitler probably could have stopped there and consolidated his position. Instead, the Eastern front was a catastrophic loss of resources that was impossible to recover from. It has been argued that one reason, if not the main reason, the US became directly involved in the war against Germany was to prevent the Soviets overrunning the fatally weakened Germans and occupying all of the territory gained by the Germans.
bobc
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:50 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby McJustice » Mon Dec 20, 2010 6:08 pm

Well Hitlers prime goal was to destroy Soviet Russia... He identified Communism and Jews as being intertwined as well. And the pact with Stalin would only work for a while. Stalin was doing a purge on his military and effectively gutted it's officer class and ability to function. But given time he would rebuild... and the longer Hitler waited the less chance of success he would have. So in a way, not taking Britain out led to all the other setbacks... the timing was all thrown off...

And yet had his armor had winter grade oil and his troops proper winter gear... the war might have been very different... lots of if and maybes...

And going back to the battle of Britain... Hitler approving the bombing of cities instead of finishing taking out all the airfields may have been the blunder that let too all the rest of his disasters...
and that was sparked by his own bombers accidentally releasing some bombs over London, The British retaliated on Berlin, Hitler freaked out and against the advice of cooler heads pulled the squadrons off taking out the rest of the RAF... which gave them breathing room and time for more planes and pilots to be available.... the War might have come down to just that... No RAF... Britain capitulates.... Barbarossa is not delayed... Moscow is taken and the Soviet Union is finished before the hard winter hits... No Stalingrad, no successful transfer of enough industry to the East of the Urals...
McJustice
 
Posts: 321
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 8:08 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Kaosium » Mon Dec 20, 2010 6:19 pm

Have you read the thread? All three of them, that is? That perhaps puts their decisions in better context. :P

On Dec 7, '41, the the fear was that the fatally weakened Soviets would be overrun, the Germans were at the outskirts of Moscow, the Soviet winter offensive was just getting underway, and previous to that something on the order of four million of the Red Army had been killed and captured, one million combined at Smolensk and Kiev alone. The Soviet air force was more or less destroyed in the opening days of the war and had yet to be rebuilt. The world expected any day to wake up and read in the paper that Moscow had fallen. That's the way the war had gone with depressing regularity until that point. Even that Winter Offensive would just give the Soviet's some breathing space, especially around Moscow, at great cost.

That's why the US sent as much material as we could to the Soviets through Archangel and Murmansk, to the chagrin of Churchill at times.
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
User avatar
Kaosium
Moderator
 
Posts: 838
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:39 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby bobc » Mon Dec 20, 2010 6:31 pm

I guess you are right, there are many points where things could have turned out differently, and look quite different with hindsight. The course of WWII seems to be an ebb and flow, the outcome never clear.

Whatever the turning point was, I am thankful there was one. And to the many heroic men and women who gave their lives.
bobc
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:50 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Chris C » Tue Dec 21, 2010 1:21 am

Yeah, well yall no my positions on the turning points. Stalingrad and Pearl Harbor.

Stalingrad because German 6th army was destroyed.
Pearl Harbor because they didn't sink any carriers and I believe all but 3 ships that where sunk were resurfaced and repaired do to the shallow water in the port.
Chris C
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 4:05 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Withnail1969 » Tue Dec 21, 2010 3:27 am

Kaosium wrote:What did he do? Did he melt down and someone deleted it before I saw it? Or was it for past indiscretions and he was on such a short leash he couldn't waver the slightest bit from the straight and narrow? I didn't see anything he posted that deserved the death sentence.

BTW, Withnail, when they were talking about WWII, before you got suspended, I wondered why you didn't chime in with the Battle of Britain as the turning point. Midway was a brilliant victory for the US, and turned the tide in the Pacific, but by the end of that war we were churning out carriers faster than we could name them, thus it only accelerated the inevitable. Pearl Harbor was critical mainly because Hitler kept his pledge to the Japanese and declared on the US; had he not, it's not definite that the US would have declared on Germany, what with a war on the other coast to fight. My own feeling is it was Stalingrad because it broke the back of the Wehrmacht, but had Britain succumbed in '40 it would have been an entirely different war. Barbarossa may have succeeded and if the US had ever gotten involved, an amphibious landing crossing the entire Atlantic is a much more difficult--perhaps nigh impossible--undertaking than merely crossing the channel.


Hitler should have tried for some kind of ceasefire with Britain and then put everything he had into a drive for Russia's oilfields. The Germans never really had enough oil to fight a massive scale war.
User avatar
Withnail1969
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:12 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby McJustice » Tue Dec 21, 2010 9:24 am

Well the plan for oil was that the southern flank would get to the oilfields around the Caspian sea... an early taking of Moscow (and Leningrad) would have freed up enough resources to push there via the Crimea or alternatives and get access to serious oil supplies... better than Romania (PloieÅŸti) and cut off the red army from their main supply in the bargain. Delays to everything in the North after a late invasion start doomed it from the outset.... Though that was not obvious till later, It made the stalemate and then disaster in Stalingrad almost inevitable... if Hitler had allowed a strategic withdrawal and drawn the Soviets out it might have gone very differently... the Soviets did not have all the improved tanks and equipment in sufficient numbers till later. And as time went on Hitler wasted huge resources on super weapons that were rushed with developmental problems... and which were too few and expensive... which may have made Kursk etc also inevitable. Russia and the US relied on raw output of supplies and in the end weight of numbers... Hitler was seduced by super weapons which were the fruit of the master race etc.. to make up for numerical inferiority... but the high level of training of his troops was the actual plus in the beginning... and then chronic shortages of mundane things like spare parts and other supplies took away a lot of his advantage... feeding super weapon programs took priority and doomed regular units who were slowly starved of support by their own side... which had the ability to keep production up in spite of the intense bombing campaign.

If there was one super weapon that might have made a difference it was the jet fighter... Hitler delayed its development by diverting resources elsewhere... he'd lost faith in the Luftwaffe. When that finally came on line it was devastating but was available too late and in small numbers... It might have destroyed the Russian air force and changed the whole eastern front... fortunately Hitler made the wrong choices yet again...

You could say that the defects in Hitler which led to there being a war in the first place doomed him and Germany in the end... not that it did not take a Herculean struggle by the allies collectively to defeat him... Without that the result would have been very much in doubt... but the combination of his own recklessness, stubbornness and other shortcomings helped a lot too... If he had been a bit more sane he would have been a lot more dangerous than he already was... BUT if that were the case... no war to begin with...
McJustice
 
Posts: 321
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 8:08 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Kaosium » Tue Dec 21, 2010 12:51 pm

Great post, McJustice, it brings to mind the joke of the SS officer when on leave bragging to his new mistress, a simple peasant girl from a neutral country, of the superiority of the master race, the brilliance of Der Fuhrer, the dominance of the Axis and of the naval prowess of their new allies, the Japanese. He gets out a map of the world to show his new girl where he's fought and what they've conquered and dismissively shows her their enemies: The Soviet Union, the British Empire and Commonwealth, and the United States. She looks up at him alarmed and says:

"Has your Fuhrer seen this map?"

Some forget, partially because of what you note, and also because Nazi economic policy was hardly as efficient as some pretend, that the Soviets in 1944 cranked out more tanks than the Germans did the entire war. They were good tanks too, the T-34 was the match of just about any Panzer until the super weapons came out--far too late to stem the tide.

Japan was doomed regardless of how many carriers they caught at Pearl. They opened fronts in the east, and south, and then found themselves with another front in the west as it restarted the Sino-Japanese war, which was no small endeavor, China is one of those places where you can win every battle but lose the war. They just absorb conquerors--that's their history. Chemical weapons, biological weapons--it didn't matter, the Chinese were still there, and what they held in China was worth more to Japan than anything but the possible exception of the rubber in the Malay peninsula and the oil in the Dutch East Indies. Crappy little islands in the Pacific just don't add up to much.

Had they just declared on the UK and the Netherlands perhaps it would have been a different story, if the US was willing to let France fall (there wasn't the level of Franco-American antagonism in those days) and watch Britain proper bloodied while just sending old destroyers and goodies under the table--paid for with hard currency and sweetheart leases--we weren't going to go to war to save the British or Dutch empires. However Japan lost that war the instant they attacked Pearl, as it was a war they could not win.

What were they going to do, take Hawaii, then land on the West coast and watch whatever force they landed get isolated and destroyed? It's funny in retrospect to see the panic Pearl Harbor caused on the West Coast, when crossing the Pacific in the numbers needed to take and hold for even the briefest period significant territory was beyond the capacity of Imperial Japan had they spent a year building nothing but transport craft, and then they couldn't supply it (and possibly even land it) without getting cut to ribbons by land-based air, it would have been an unmitigated disaster. Isolated in a land with a massive rail network, huge industrial capacity and where every male of military age could lay hands on a gun in extremity.
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
User avatar
Kaosium
Moderator
 
Posts: 838
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:39 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby McJustice » Tue Dec 21, 2010 3:39 pm

A crazy gamble... the Imperial Navy was more aware of the wider world... and not in favor of attacking the US as much as the Army was. but the Army had the upper hand politically... the Emperor... or those who spoke in his name and mostly ran things, pushed for a knockout blow that would make retaliation from the US difficult. No pacific fleet (with the carriers), Midway taken, able to threaten Hawaii the US cannot defend or strike back effectively so perhaps some sort of truce or agreement is hammered out... the Japanese keep the Philippines and take what they want in South-East Asia without worrying about the US for at least a while. Yamamoto warned they would just be waking the sleeping giant and he was right... Even with the carriers taken out... the US would not have stood for the loss of Islands and the Philippines... but the war would have been tougher. Maybe with Hitler declaring war on the US as he did but the US not being able to do anything right away in the Pacific they might have poured more into defeating Hitler sooner. Would D-Day have happened sooner? All the North Africa campaigns sped up... Italy invaded sooner...

But perhaps all of these had to wait till the time was right... had to happen when they happened... Maybe Germany needed to be ground down in the East first the way it was... But maybe if the US committed more to the European theater sooner due to being shut out from the Pacific for maybe a year... the war would have gone differently... Europe wound up sooner, the Soviets not gobbling up all of Eastern Europe, Germany not divided... etc. The US England and France reach Berlin sooner... And a delayed fightback in the Pacific based on early defense of Australia in New Guinea... but without carriers it would have been problematical... but once new carriers came online and Island hopping done in maybe a different direction the overstretched Japanese Empire would have been ground down... And with the European theater wrapped up earlier all the full focus would have come in the Pacific that much sooner... but with Island hopping delayed and in a different order... being able to launch Atomic strikes would also have taken much longer... so maybe the war would have ended differently without unconditional surrender and no Nukes. Maybe a "demonstration" on an unpopulated but occupied island would have been undertaken as a threat to make them sue for peace... less horrendous than on a city and maybe by then the Japanese would have had to negotiate a withdrawal from many of their conquests... They would have stayed out of reach from strategic bombing for longer and perhaps almost entirely. Maybe the threat of each of their Island garrisons being nuked one after another (with some spared for conventional assault to get airfields) the effect on the environment would have been catastrophic eventually. But the scarcity and difficulty of deliver would have meant only careful strategic choice of targets and the possibility of taking out an entire fleet at once would have forced the Japanese empire into negotiations for a settlement.

But this would be probably only happen after a longer war... into 46 or 47? and nobody getting all of what they wanted. Perhaps getting independence for French Asian colonies... and British and Netherlands too? in exchange for the Japanese withdrawing... A victory for their anti-colonial propaganda... Manchuria stays under Japanese control? Hard to say what Stalin would have done in the Far East... maybe the Soviets would have intervened as they did but not against a severely weakened Japan... it might not have gone as easily as it did. So from a position of greater strength the Japanese would end up with more than they started with? The US retakes only part of the Philippines? And the Chinese mainland? Partition? Chang Kai Shek allies with Japan against Mao and the Communists? Korea stays Japanese? they had occupied it for a long time already...

And possibly all due to the decision to take the carriers out on training cruises (or to get them out of the way just in case)... we have the world we live in now... instead of a hardly recognizable Pacific war...
Japan was just hoping to buy time... they did not buy enough. But even if they had taken out the carriers, they still would have been forced back partially if not completely in the end.
McJustice
 
Posts: 321
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 8:08 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Kaosium » Sat Dec 25, 2010 3:12 pm

I didn't know how to respond to this as you bring up a number of interesting points, but I think perhaps it would have ended even uglier for the Japanese were the war to drag on later, as we would have had more of those 'superbombs' had it lasted to '46 or '47, and today there might not be a Kyoto or Tokyo. This was an 'unconditional surrender' kinda war, they wouldn't be allowed to hold anything in the end, it was just a matter of time--and dead human beings. I take no joy in saying that, I just get an impression that might have been how it all ended had things gone differently, being as they were at war with three major powers they couldn't conquer, and another they couldn't touch; one that bordered them at war with all their allies (Soviet Union) and they had conducted hostilities against before the war to their abject defeat and whom might want to rectify a past humiliation. (Russo-Japanese War)

Had they caught all three carriers at Pearl they might have tried for Australia, or at best run into India, which would mean, with China and the US/British Empire-Commonwealth they were directly at war with the majority of the human population, one that had little reason to be merciful considering the way they'd conducted themselves. I suspect the Japanese were doomed regardless.

However, the Germans had the capacity to knock out two of their biggest enemies, that's why I think the turning point had to be the Battle of Britain or Stalingrad as both were possibly winnable and they were turned back at great cost which would change the course of the war. I think it an interesting question, because while the Germans lost far more at Stalingrad, they might have won that had they been able to completely secure that west flank beforehand. I go with what happened being as it actually killed more fascists, and while speculative history is fun the best part about it is no one dies. :)
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
User avatar
Kaosium
Moderator
 
Posts: 838
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:39 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Kaosium » Wed Feb 02, 2011 10:15 pm

I suppose I might resurrect this, being as with the Groundhog Day's Massacre there's plenty to post in it now!

I couldn't figure out why Chris C got a month. Geez, I must have missed that post! Or for that matter Withnail who seemed to be on remarkably good behavior and had done nothing to get banned for life. They're getting pretty merciless!

I've started posting over at this board:
http://boards.insessiontrials.com/showthread.php?375490-Judge-Approves-Another-Look-See-at-DNA&p=14781464&posted=1#post14781464

So far it's dgfred and Emerald from PMF and someone named Darcy who might be a local, against Malkmus and a couple of locals with a few that might be undecided. It's a decent board, certainly better than that Harvard political review which was so sketchy, thus some might be interested. It has a nice repository of case materials as well, thus no need to stare into the abyss like at PMF.

BTW, how on earth did Lionking manage to tiptoe through the raindrops like that? He was just as bad as any of them or us, but he gets off scot-free.
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
User avatar
Kaosium
Moderator
 
Posts: 838
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:39 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Sarah » Wed Feb 02, 2011 10:39 pm

Kaosium,

Is there a place on JREF we could start a thread protesting the over moderation of the thread?
User avatar
Sarah
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3542
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 11:23 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Kaosium » Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:24 am

Sarah wrote:Kaosium,

Is there a place on JREF we could start a thread protesting the over moderation of the thread?


Yes, forum management, where Halides1 started his 'disappointed' thread. I think a case can be made for both factions being over-moderated in this debate. Solange's total banning was a bizarre over-reaction as well. I think a lot of them deserved more of a banning due to behavior, but some of the ticky-tack ones resulting in two-week and full month bans were bizarre, and by and large the guilt faction took a lot of hits in this debate. Frankly I'd rather post where the ones I disagree with are, I don't want to engage in 'friendly fire' and I like a good spat. :)

We are kind of benighted over there as many of us are considered 'single-issue' posters. The ones who rack up 18k one line posts telling everyone in a debate how much they suck and flirting with the cute Swedish chef get more of a hearing as they post that drivel everywhere and become considered more of the 'community.' We, on the other hand, get lumped in with the ones pushing holocaust denial, 911 conspiracies and the like as generally those only have interest in their own subject. The fact that a number of posters like Stilicho, Quadringinta, Alt, Lionking, and the 'late' Fiona posted on numerous subjects and made 'friends' elsewhere and were inclined towards guilt might give some the impression that we are the 'outsiders' invading JREF and making the habitat unpalatable to the JREF 'community.' You saw an indication of that when Kevin posted his thread originally in 'Forum Community' and got drowned in kittens and cookbooks. Also that Dutchie (DDT?) was lecturing me on that in Halides1 thread. Oddly enough I have lurked JREF for years, but don't post as I've been there, done that with those kind of 'discussions.'

Rolfe is highly respected there, and she has stayed out of it probably mainly because of the acrimony--and she doesn't know any of us from Adam. She has a definite interest in cases of this nature, and would see the truth of it were she to venture in, which hopefully might happen since all of us 'meanies' have been sidelined. I suspect the reason The Groundhog Day Massacre was almost all supporters of the cause of Amanda and Raffaele being innocent was because a lot were 'piling on' Alt. Although it could be total waste of time, someone with knowledge of one of the other gross miscarriages of justice could join in a thread with Rolfe which might lead naturally to her showing greater interest in the case of Amanda and Raffaele if that poster wins her respect. That might have a positive effect forum-wide. I can't do that as I know nothing about the West Memphis Three, and didn't even know there was a controversy over the Lockerbie bombing. That's in Scotland, right? A plane blew up or something? That's all I know. :)

I think it would help if some of us would stop pushing that mod call button too... ;)
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
User avatar
Kaosium
Moderator
 
Posts: 838
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:39 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby RoseMontague » Thu Feb 03, 2011 5:41 am

Yes,
I could see this latest burning of Atlanta coming. I was surprised with Withnail's banning and Charlie and Mary did not do anything that I can recall. The mods were just waiting for an excuse because they don't like to be bothered. That thread has a certain reputation and as you pointed out, long time posters that have made friends on other topics get priority. Most got warnings if they did not get suspended or banned including me and halides1. I registered as RedMontain on that other board and will probably give it more attention. There is a lot of politics in play at JREF.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby CD-Host » Thu Feb 03, 2011 7:57 am

Kaosium wrote:I think it would help if some of us would stop pushing that mod call button too... ;)

That's a good tip. So I wanted to isolate it so it gets noticed.
CD-Host
 
Posts: 210
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 12:33 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Withnail1969 » Thu Feb 03, 2011 8:31 am

Kaosium wrote:I suppose I might resurrect this, being as with the Groundhog Day's Massacre there's plenty to post in it now!

I couldn't figure out why Chris C got a month. Geez, I must have missed that post! Or for that matter Withnail who seemed to be on remarkably good behavior and had done nothing to get banned for life. They're getting pretty merciless!


I'll tell you exactly why I was banned. A week or so ago I received a very rude PM from Lisa Reik (loverofzion on JREF) accusing me of being a racist and an anti-Semite. She also accused me of stating she was 'pretending to be Jewish'. It turned out she had actually confused me with another poster, Chris_C.

Because I received this PM, I assumed that sending rude PM's was not forbidden on JREF (It's not mentioned in the Membership Agreement).

As a result, I sent a rude PM to ALT+F4 suggesting that she would have trouble walking and chewing gum at the same time. Just prior to this, I had received a warning for suggesting that ALT+F4 might be having 'an episode' when she randomly wandered off topic to deflect attention from her ludicrous statements. I then received another warning for my rude PM.

So being on probation to start with, 2 warnings in 10 days was fatal for me.
User avatar
Withnail1969
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:12 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Justinian » Thu Feb 03, 2011 9:50 am

I escaped the initial burning of Atlanta. When I went back the forum was closed. So I posted a couple of messages and was quickly suspended for a week with a probation period extending until May 9th. The duration of my suspension fluctuated for awhile as if there was an internal struggle going on.

I won't make May 9th because I don't deliberately break the forum rules anyway. It's the moderators that think I break them. I didn't know about the PM rules. I did violate those once. The 'punishers' on that forum (guilters) want to get us punished so they set traps. If one publishes a personal comment with his post, they reply to the personal comment until the original poster gets a warning for violating rule 11.

The mod replied that my reply to the statement "Cockroaches scatter when you shine the light on them" was a violation of rule 11. I said it was a allegory to truth. I said liars run when exposed to the truth!

It was a violation of a hidden rule that states that posters cannot post allegories.

What other hidden rules are there?
Is it ignorance or apathy? Hey, I don’t know and I don’t care. -- Jimmy Buffett
Anti-intellectualism is plausibly anger against those that undermine ones' biases.
User avatar
Justinian
 
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:51 am
Location: European American

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Withnail1969 » Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:32 am

Justinian wrote:I won't make May 9th because I don't deliberately break the forum rules anyway. It's the moderators that think I break them. I didn't know about the PM rules. I did violate those once.


There are no 'PM rules' as far as I know. The moderator who gave me the warning about my rude PM quoted verbatim 'Rule 0', which states that you should not make uncivil posts.
User avatar
Withnail1969
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:12 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Sarah » Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:40 am

CD-Host wrote:
Kaosium wrote:I think it would help if some of us would stop pushing that mod call button too... ;)

That's a good tip. So I wanted to isolate it so it gets noticed.


I agree with that.

I posted a comment about the moderation. Could the rest of you chime in with your opinions also?

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=199466&page=2
User avatar
Sarah
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3542
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 11:23 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Justinian » Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:45 am

Withnail1969 wrote:
Justinian wrote:I won't make May 9th because I don't deliberately break the forum rules anyway. It's the moderators that think I break them. I didn't know about the PM rules. I did violate those once.


There are no 'PM rules' as far as I know. The moderator who gave me the warning about my rude PM quoted verbatim 'Rule 0', which states that you should not make uncivil posts.


So hidden rule #2 is that a person's PM's (Private Messages) aren't private. :shock:
Is it ignorance or apathy? Hey, I don’t know and I don’t care. -- Jimmy Buffett
Anti-intellectualism is plausibly anger against those that undermine ones' biases.
User avatar
Justinian
 
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:51 am
Location: European American

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Justinian » Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:47 am

Sarah wrote:
CD-Host wrote:
Kaosium wrote:I think it would help if some of us would stop pushing that mod call button too... ;)

That's a good tip. So I wanted to isolate it so it gets noticed.


I agree with that.

I posted a comment about the moderation. Could the rest of you chime in with your opinions also?

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=199466&page=2


That's the last place I posted before my suspension. Good luck!
Is it ignorance or apathy? Hey, I don’t know and I don’t care. -- Jimmy Buffett
Anti-intellectualism is plausibly anger against those that undermine ones' biases.
User avatar
Justinian
 
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:51 am
Location: European American

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Withnail1969 » Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:49 am

Justinian wrote:
Withnail1969 wrote:
Justinian wrote:I won't make May 9th because I don't deliberately break the forum rules anyway. It's the moderators that think I break them. I didn't know about the PM rules. I did violate those once.


There are no 'PM rules' as far as I know. The moderator who gave me the warning about my rude PM quoted verbatim 'Rule 0', which states that you should not make uncivil posts.


So hidden rule #2 is that a person's PM's (Private Messages) aren't private. :shock:


Exactly. I thought the content of PM's could not be disclosed, even to moderators. There was nothing threatening or illegal about my PM to ALT+F4, I simply called her an idiot.
User avatar
Withnail1969
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:12 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby charlie_wilkes » Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:54 am

I am through with JREF. I don't care what they do. I can live with rules, but only if I understand them, and I don't understand how the post they cited could be construed as an attempt to derail a thread. I will not subordinate myself to blockheads who impose arbitrary sanctions just to show that they are in charge.

I have been ignoring this forum, just because I only can concentrate on so much. Getting booted off JREF is a good reason to focus on this place, which Bruce and many others have worked hard to make available.
User avatar
charlie_wilkes
 
Posts: 2027
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 10:58 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Withnail1969 » Thu Feb 03, 2011 10:59 am

charlie_wilkes wrote:I am through with JREF. I don't care what they do. I can live with rules, but only if I understand them, and I don't understand how the post they cited could be construed as an attempt to derail a thread. I will not subordinate myself to blockheads who impose arbitrary sanctions just to show that they are in charge.

I have been ignoring this forum, just because I only can concentrate on so much. Getting booted off JREF is a good reason to focus on this place, which Bruce and many others have worked hard to make available.



You in no way tried to derail the thread. The main person trying to do that has been the cretinous lionking, who amazingly has escaped a suspension.
User avatar
Withnail1969
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:12 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Chris C » Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:12 am

charlie_wilkes wrote:I am through with JREF. I don't care what they do. I can live with rules, but only if I understand them, and I don't understand how the post they cited could be construed as an attempt to derail a thread. I will not subordinate myself to blockheads who impose arbitrary sanctions just to show that they are in charge.

I have been ignoring this forum, just because I only can concentrate on so much. Getting booted off JREF is a good reason to focus on this place, which Bruce and many others have worked hard to make available.

I agree, I have gotten 2 infractions total there.
1st infraction got me suspended for telling someone I was putting them on ignore.
2nd infraction not quite sure about. I was told I was blantanly trying to derail a thread. I replied to a post that someone else started. The content i posted was about about quennell and his ballerina website. How thats off topic, I'm not sure. If steve moore had a ballerina website they would be talking about it every 3 posts on JREF. What I have noticed at JREF, is its ok for people to talk about pro innocent websites and their creators, but if you mention something about guilter websites you get suspended.
Chris C
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 4:05 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Sarah » Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:15 am

Withnail1969 wrote:
Exactly. I thought the content of PM's could not be disclosed, even to moderators. There was nothing threatening or illegal about my PM to ALT+F4, I simply called her an idiot.


Withnail,

Come on now! How is that possibly not out of line? That is a direct personal attack. I wouldn't want someone to do that to me. Would you want that? I can't find faults with the mods on that one if you did that. Which I regret you did, because you have added a lot to the conversation there.
User avatar
Sarah
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3542
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 11:23 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Withnail1969 » Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:18 am

Chris C wrote:
charlie_wilkes wrote:I am through with JREF. I don't care what they do. I can live with rules, but only if I understand them, and I don't understand how the post they cited could be construed as an attempt to derail a thread. I will not subordinate myself to blockheads who impose arbitrary sanctions just to show that they are in charge.

I have been ignoring this forum, just because I only can concentrate on so much. Getting booted off JREF is a good reason to focus on this place, which Bruce and many others have worked hard to make available.

I agree, I have gotten 2 infractions total there.
1st infraction got me suspended for telling someone I was putting them on ignore.
2nd infraction not quite sure about. I was told I was blantanly trying to derail a thread. I replied to a post that someone else started. The content i posted was about about quennell and his ballerina website. How thats off topic, I'm not sure. If steve moore had a ballerina website they would be talking about it every 3 posts on JREF. What I have noticed at JREF, is its ok for people to talk about pro innocent websites and their creators, but if you mention something about guilter websites you get suspended.


The material about Peter Quennell's creepy website about the jailbait ballerina was absolutely relevant to the discussion, because guilters usually brand innocentisti as 'perverts' who want to have sex with Amanda Knox. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that Peter Quennell got busted for some kind of under-age sex rap having seen his pathetic websites.
User avatar
Withnail1969
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:12 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Chris C » Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:24 am

Like i said, thats the comment I got suspended for. However, I went through all my other posts that got moved, and everyone of them was on topic or a reply to something that was close to on topic. None of them were derogatory to any user either. I'll just work out more, since I can't post there. Need to drop 20 more pounds. Wonder if I can do that in a month.
Chris C
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 4:05 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Withnail1969 » Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:26 am

Sarah wrote:
Withnail1969 wrote:
Exactly. I thought the content of PM's could not be disclosed, even to moderators. There was nothing threatening or illegal about my PM to ALT+F4, I simply called her an idiot.


Withnail,

Come on now! How is that possibly not out of line? That is a direct personal attack. I wouldn't want someone to do that to me. Would you want that? I can't find faults with the mods on that one if you did that. Which I regret you did, because you have added a lot to the conversation there.


Yes it was a personal attack. I thought after the personal attack I myself received via PM, that personal attacks via PM were OK. I have never done this before or since.

I wouldn't mind it in the slightest if someone called me an idiot via PM or any other method. If someone calls me an idiot I usually try to examine why they are calling me that, and often it turns out that i really have been an idiot.
User avatar
Withnail1969
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:12 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Sarah » Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:48 am

Withnail1969 wrote:
Yes it was a personal attack. I thought after the personal attack I myself received via PM, that personal attacks via PM were OK. I have never done this before or since.

I wouldn't mind it in the slightest if someone called me an idiot via PM or any other method. If someone calls me an idiot I usually try to examine why they are calling me that, and often it turns out that i really have been an idiot.


I guess if you had reported that PM, that person would have been in trouble also. You weren't responding to Alt -4 though were you? I can understand responding back to something. I wish you could take it back somehow and keep posting. Did Alt-4 report the PM or did the Mods just read it? I didn't know they could do that, unless reported.
User avatar
Sarah
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3542
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 11:23 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Sarah » Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:52 am

"I suggest you read the membership agreement first. What you suggest would be off topic, at the least."

What is Zooterkin saying with this post? Is this discussion in the wrong place? Are we not allowed to question the mods actions? I'm not sure what is being done wrong.

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p= ... stcount=79
User avatar
Sarah
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3542
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 11:23 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Withnail1969 » Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:06 pm

Sarah wrote:
Withnail1969 wrote:
Yes it was a personal attack. I thought after the personal attack I myself received via PM, that personal attacks via PM were OK. I have never done this before or since.

I wouldn't mind it in the slightest if someone called me an idiot via PM or any other method. If someone calls me an idiot I usually try to examine why they are calling me that, and often it turns out that i really have been an idiot.


I guess if you had reported that PM, that person would have been in trouble also. You weren't responding to Alt -4 though were you? I can understand responding back to something. I wish you could take it back somehow and keep posting. Did Alt-4 report the PM or did the Mods just read it? I didn't know they could do that, unless reported.


I did report the PM I received, but only after I got into trouble for sending my own rude PM. Initially I responded politely to loverofzion asking her why she was saying I had said things which I hadn't said (She thought I was Chris_C). Nothing has happened to the sender. I'm sure ALT+F4 reported the PM I sent, as there's no other way the mods could have heard about it.

I'm sorry I was banned, but like Chris_C, I think being banned/suspended will enable me to concentrate on real-life things I should be doing. That's the only way i can really rationalise what's happened right now.
User avatar
Withnail1969
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:12 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby CD-Host » Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:42 pm

Withnail1969 wrote: The material about Peter Quennell's creepy website about the jailbait ballerina was absolutely relevant to the discussion, because guilters usually brand innocentisti as 'perverts' who want to have sex with Amanda Knox. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that Peter Quennell got busted for some kind of under-age sex rap having seen his pathetic websites.


I said that directly to Peter essentially during our IMDB debate. I mentioned that his website used Meredith's face as a background, he has no right to talk about anyone else being creepy. As I've said before; Amanda is cute not breathtaking, and she was just as cute when I thought she was guilty.
CD-Host
 
Posts: 210
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 12:33 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Withnail1969 » Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:09 pm

CD-Host wrote:
Withnail1969 wrote: The material about Peter Quennell's creepy website about the jailbait ballerina was absolutely relevant to the discussion, because guilters usually brand innocentisti as 'perverts' who want to have sex with Amanda Knox. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that Peter Quennell got busted for some kind of under-age sex rap having seen his pathetic websites.


I said that directly to Peter essentially during our IMDB debate. I mentioned that his website used Meredith's face as a background, he has no right to talk about anyone else being creepy. As I've said before; Amanda is cute not breathtaking, and she was just as cute when I thought she was guilty.


If you haven't already seen Peter Quennell's perverted site devoted to a very young Finnish ballerina, here it is. http://excitingarrivals.com/
User avatar
Withnail1969
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:12 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Justinian » Thu Feb 03, 2011 2:19 pm

Sarah wrote:"I suggest you read the membership agreement first. What you suggest would be off topic, at the least."

What is Zooterkin saying with this post? Is this discussion in the wrong place? Are we not allowed to question the mods actions? I'm not sure what is being done wrong.

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p= ... stcount=79


The guilters we are discussing try to bait the innocentisti to get them kicked off the threads. They persevere in their ad homs until the innocentisti react, and then they hit the report button. The moderator enters, punishes the innocentisti and lets the guilter go.

However, many of the guilters have been banished for life. It's just much easier for them to get banished. Withnail1969 did the least of any to get banished.

Withnail wasn't perfect. He did have an annoying signature line that listed the posters he had on ignore (including me)

However, unlike the guilters, there was nothing objectionable in Withnail1969's posts and we usually agreed.
Is it ignorance or apathy? Hey, I don’t know and I don’t care. -- Jimmy Buffett
Anti-intellectualism is plausibly anger against those that undermine ones' biases.
User avatar
Justinian
 
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:51 am
Location: European American

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby CD-Host » Thu Feb 03, 2011 3:49 pm

Justinian wrote: The guilters we are discussing try to bait the innocentisti to get them kicked off the threads. They persevere in their ad homs until the innocentisti react, and then they hit the report button. The moderator enters, punishes the innocentisti and lets the guilter go.


Really? They are scum.
CD-Host
 
Posts: 210
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 12:33 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Justinian » Thu Feb 03, 2011 7:00 pm

Sarah wrote:
Withnail1969 wrote:
Exactly. I thought the content of PM's could not be disclosed, even to moderators. There was nothing threatening or illegal about my PM to ALT+F4, I simply called her an idiot.


Withnail,

Come on now! How is that possibly not out of line? That is a direct personal attack. I wouldn't want someone to do that to me. Would you want that? I can't find faults with the mods on that one if you did that. Which I regret you did, because you have added a lot to the conversation there.


I have been called an idiot hundreds of times and have never called anyone an idiot. To me, calling someone an idiot requires so little thought that it is equivalent being an idiot.

I once called someone sub worthless. I thought it was more to the point. However, I have never called anyone an idiot! The only time I used that term, I was instantly tossed from the forum for life. I mean the moderator was prejudiced - he was a guilter. He deserved it.
Is it ignorance or apathy? Hey, I don’t know and I don’t care. -- Jimmy Buffett
Anti-intellectualism is plausibly anger against those that undermine ones' biases.
User avatar
Justinian
 
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:51 am
Location: European American

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Justinian » Thu Feb 03, 2011 7:12 pm

My reason for suspension is becoming more clear. I just got the following PM at JREF.

I will look into whether we need to reverse the infraction and reissue a "Custom" infraction or whether a note in your "Report Log" entry is the best way to ensure the actual moderation actions and reasons for that are clear.

Regards

Darat
JREF Forum Admin


A "Custom" infraction was the reason that I was suspended. It was the straw that broke the camel's back in a long sequence of custom infractions. What's a "Custom" infraction?

I guess that too will become clear with time.
Is it ignorance or apathy? Hey, I don’t know and I don’t care. -- Jimmy Buffett
Anti-intellectualism is plausibly anger against those that undermine ones' biases.
User avatar
Justinian
 
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:51 am
Location: European American

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Kaosium » Thu Feb 03, 2011 8:38 pm

charlie_wilkes wrote:I am through with JREF. I don't care what they do. I can live with rules, but only if I understand them, and I don't understand how the post they cited could be construed as an attempt to derail a thread. I will not subordinate myself to blockheads who impose arbitrary sanctions just to show that they are in charge.

I have been ignoring this forum, just because I only can concentrate on so much. Getting booted off JREF is a good reason to focus on this place, which Bruce and many others have worked hard to make available.


I wish you'd reconsider, Charlie. You and your vast knowledge of this and cases similar is vital to that thread, and you unique experience regarding the case irreplaceable.

When they do a 'clean-out' like that, it appears they go back and look at every single post in the thread, and then tag something onto a post in AAH, which generally has little to do with why the person is suspended. A while back on the thread it appeared you lost your temper and some posts ended up being moderated if I recall correctly. There might have been something about derailing too, I forget. At any rate that's likely the real reason you were suspended for three days, it was a blanket party.
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
User avatar
Kaosium
Moderator
 
Posts: 838
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:39 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Justinian » Thu Feb 03, 2011 8:44 pm

Kaosium wrote:
charlie_wilkes wrote:I am through with JREF. I don't care what they do. I can live with rules, but only if I understand them, and I don't understand how the post they cited could be construed as an attempt to derail a thread. I will not subordinate myself to blockheads who impose arbitrary sanctions just to show that they are in charge.

I have been ignoring this forum, just because I only can concentrate on so much. Getting booted off JREF is a good reason to focus on this place, which Bruce and many others have worked hard to make available.


I wish you'd reconsider, Charlie. You and your vast knowledge of this and cases similar is vital to that thread, and you unique experience regarding the case irreplaceable.

When they do a 'clean-out' like that, it appears they go back and look at every single post in the thread, and then tag something onto a post in AAH, which generally has little to do with why the person is suspended. A while back on the thread it appeared you lost your temper and some posts ended up being moderated if I recall correctly. There might have been something about derailing too, I forget. At any rate that's likely the real reason you were suspended for three days, it was a blanket party.


Maybe Charlie got his own "Custom infraction" like I did. He can call it rule Charlie.
Is it ignorance or apathy? Hey, I don’t know and I don’t care. -- Jimmy Buffett
Anti-intellectualism is plausibly anger against those that undermine ones' biases.
User avatar
Justinian
 
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:51 am
Location: European American

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Dan O. » Fri Feb 04, 2011 1:02 am

Kaosium wrote:Rolfe is highly respected there, and she has stayed out of it probably mainly because of the acrimony--and she doesn't know any of us from Adam. She has a definite interest in cases of this nature, and would see the truth of it were she to venture in, which hopefully might happen since all of us 'meanies' have been sidelined. ... Although it could be total waste of time, someone with knowledge of one of the other gross miscarriages of justice could join in a thread with Rolfe which might lead naturally to her showing greater interest in the case of Amanda and Raffaele if that poster wins her respect. That might have a positive effect forum-wide. I can't do that as I know nothing about the West Memphis Three, and didn't even know there was a controversy over the Lockerbie bombing. That's in Scotland, right? A plane blew up or something? That's all I know. :)


If you want to know what the Lockerbie thing was, you could check it out on this wiki (note the last editor on that page).

Then check out the earliest couple of pages of uploaded files. That probably best shows what I was up to just before getting involved in this case. I wish we could get a similar anonymous contribution here.

I can understand Ralfe's reluctance not to get involved in another case. Just keeping up with the information flow on one case is all I have time for.
... and remember that you can never assume that you are completely anonymous or that you cannot be identified by your online comments. -- (from the ISF membership agreement)
Dan O.
 
Posts: 1059
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 12:57 am
Location: Home is where I hug my cat

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby RoseMontague » Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:53 am

charlie_wilkes wrote:I am through with JREF. I don't care what they do. I can live with rules, but only if I understand them, and I don't understand how the post they cited could be construed as an attempt to derail a thread. I will not subordinate myself to blockheads who impose arbitrary sanctions just to show that they are in charge.

I have been ignoring this forum, just because I only can concentrate on so much. Getting booted off JREF is a good reason to focus on this place, which Bruce and many others have worked hard to make available.


I am at about the same point and a warning for the same rule violation on a post that I was trying to be nice about things just makes it more ridiculous, imo. The only thing that really bothers me about not posting there is that is exactly what the PMF tribe was trying to accomplish.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Justinian » Fri Feb 04, 2011 7:03 am

RoseMontague wrote:
charlie_wilkes wrote:I am through with JREF. I don't care what they do. I can live with rules, but only if I understand them, and I don't understand how the post they cited could be construed as an attempt to derail a thread. I will not subordinate myself to blockheads who impose arbitrary sanctions just to show that they are in charge.

I have been ignoring this forum, just because I only can concentrate on so much. Getting booted off JREF is a good reason to focus on this place, which Bruce and many others have worked hard to make available.


I am at about the same point and a warning for the same rule violation on a post that I was trying to be nice about things just makes it more ridiculous, imo. The only thing that really bothers me about not posting there is that is exactly what the PMF tribe was trying to accomplish.


Rose,
You were the calmest, nicest person on any board that I've seen. You had more patience than anybody.

If they were to make a custom infraction for you it would be the being too nice rule.

Same with Charlie. He violated the too nice to guilter rule.

My custom rule would probably be for using the word 'guilter', or other similar generalizations, too much. It upsets guilters to be called guilters.

Perhaps some of the guilters aren't guilters any more????
Is it ignorance or apathy? Hey, I don’t know and I don’t care. -- Jimmy Buffett
Anti-intellectualism is plausibly anger against those that undermine ones' biases.
User avatar
Justinian
 
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:51 am
Location: European American

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby RoseMontague » Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:21 pm

Justinian wrote:
RoseMontague wrote:
charlie_wilkes wrote:I am through with JREF. I don't care what they do. I can live with rules, but only if I understand them, and I don't understand how the post they cited could be construed as an attempt to derail a thread. I will not subordinate myself to blockheads who impose arbitrary sanctions just to show that they are in charge.

I have been ignoring this forum, just because I only can concentrate on so much. Getting booted off JREF is a good reason to focus on this place, which Bruce and many others have worked hard to make available.


I am at about the same point and a warning for the same rule violation on a post that I was trying to be nice about things just makes it more ridiculous, imo. The only thing that really bothers me about not posting there is that is exactly what the PMF tribe was trying to accomplish.


Rose,
You were the calmest, nicest person on any board that I've seen. You had more patience than anybody.

If they were to make a custom infraction for you it would be the being too nice rule.

Same with Charlie. He violated the too nice to guilter rule.

My custom rule would probably be for using the word 'guilter', or other similar generalizations, too much. It upsets guilters to be called guilters.

Perhaps some of the guilters aren't guilters any more????


Thank you Justinian. I have been distressed over this because I felt that the moderation of posters was done to make a point and many of the actions taken by the moderators were unfair. You have made me feel better and I appreciate you and your contributions.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby CD-Host » Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:29 pm

RoseMontague wrote:Thank you Justinian. I have been distressed over this because I felt that the moderation of posters was done to make a point and many of the actions taken by the moderators were unfair. You have made me feel better and I appreciate you and your contributions.


What point did you think they were making? BTW I agree with Justinian, feel free to give me stronger warning is I go back to JREF.
CD-Host
 
Posts: 210
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 12:33 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby RoseMontague » Fri Feb 04, 2011 5:45 pm

I believe they were trying to purge the thread not in an effort to make it more civil but in an effort to make it less of a hassle for them to deal with. Some of the warnings and suspensions were ridiculous and a few of the posts that were infracted did not even warrant a move to AAH. I get the impression that they do not even care if they made the correct decisions.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby CD-Host » Fri Feb 04, 2011 7:48 pm

RoseMontague wrote:I believe they were trying to purge the thread not in an effort to make it more civil but in an effort to make it less of a hassle for them to deal with. Some of the warnings and suspensions were ridiculous and a few of the posts that were infracted did not even warrant a move to AAH. I get the impression that they do not even care if they made the correct decisions.


Rose I agree. ITo use Bill Cosby's line "I want quiet, not justice!" is where I think Darat's head was at.
CD-Host
 
Posts: 210
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 12:33 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Justinian » Sat Feb 05, 2011 8:07 am

In a thread on the Lunar Landings, I was warned by the moderators to stop hitting the report buttor or I would be suspended.

* The (JREF) hidden rule of the allegory or personal story: The moderator, reading glibly, will warn you for trying to derail the thread.
* The (JREF) hidden rule of the PM: PM's (Private Messages) aren't private and you will be suspended if you aren't always super agreeable in a PM.
* The (JREF) hidden rule of the pattern recognition and subsequent generalization: Any attempt at intelligence and cognition results in suspension.
* The (JREF) hidden rule of the report button: You will be suspended if you hit it too much and the moderator disagrees with you.
* The (JREF) hidden rule of attacking the person instead of the argument: It's OK if the moderator agrees.
* The (JREF) hidden rule of moderators: They will enforce or not enforce the rules in a manner consistent with their beliefs or prejudices.
* The (JREF) hidden rule: Custom rules will be enforced without ever telling the poster what the custom rule violation was.
Is it ignorance or apathy? Hey, I don’t know and I don’t care. -- Jimmy Buffett
Anti-intellectualism is plausibly anger against those that undermine ones' biases.
User avatar
Justinian
 
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:51 am
Location: European American

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Jazz » Sat Feb 05, 2011 11:22 am

I think the mass suspensions/bannings were not done out of malice but probably out of a combination of inexperienced mods and an overzealous admin. Seeing the kind of posts that were moved to AAH while other ones were left in the thread, and seeing the kind of posts that were given yellow cards makes me think it was a newbie Mod who did the cull, and reading Darat's "explanations" makes me think that the whole thing is just a big screwup but Darat won't back down because he doesn't want to lose face or something.
Jazz
 
Posts: 307
Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 9:52 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Withnail1969 » Sat Feb 05, 2011 11:45 am

Jazz wrote:I think the mass suspensions/bannings were not done out of malice but probably out of a combination of inexperienced mods and an overzealous admin. Seeing the kind of posts that were moved to AAH while other ones were left in the thread, and seeing the kind of posts that were given yellow cards makes me think it was a newbie Mod who did the cull, and reading Darat's "explanations" makes me think that the whole thing is just a big screwup but Darat won't back down because he doesn't want to lose face or something.


At least treehorn was banned. I myself was also banned, but at least i took that SoB with me.
User avatar
Withnail1969
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:12 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Justinian » Sat Feb 05, 2011 12:56 pm

Withnail1969 wrote:
At least treehorn was banned. I myself was also banned, but at least i took that SoB with me.


Thank you.
Is it ignorance or apathy? Hey, I don’t know and I don’t care. -- Jimmy Buffett
Anti-intellectualism is plausibly anger against those that undermine ones' biases.
User avatar
Justinian
 
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:51 am
Location: European American

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Justinian » Sun Feb 06, 2011 1:16 pm

I have received warnings at JREF for jokes, allegories, illustrative stories, the content of PMs ('private' messages), hitting the report button (for obvious rule violations), for NOT hitting the report button (replying to the rule violations), for recognizing patterns, for generalizations, for telling the truth, for discussing guilter personalities (or lack thereof) and for other 'custom' reasons.
Is it ignorance or apathy? Hey, I don’t know and I don’t care. -- Jimmy Buffett
Anti-intellectualism is plausibly anger against those that undermine ones' biases.
User avatar
Justinian
 
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:51 am
Location: European American

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby RoseMontague » Sun Feb 06, 2011 2:39 pm

LOL. Sometimes you have to laugh. Mine was for asking people to be nice to each other. go figure.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Sarah » Sun Feb 06, 2011 9:28 pm

I'm still disturbed by the groundhogs day massacre. :D

I've now written several comments on the 'disappointment thread' and none of the MODs have responded to anything I've posted. Even when I called for change and discussion. I sent a PM to Darat and never got a response either. Which MOD were responsible for doing this?

Disappointment over closing the Amanda Knox thread
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=199466

Abandon All Hope thread
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=199504
User avatar
Sarah
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3542
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 11:23 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby CD-Host » Mon Feb 07, 2011 12:19 pm

Sarah wrote:I'm still disturbed by the groundhogs day massacre. :D

I've now written several comments on the 'disappointment thread' and none of the MODs have responded to anything I've posted. Even when I called for change and discussion. I sent a PM to Darat and never got a response either. Which MOD were responsible for doing this?

Disappointment over closing the Amanda Knox thread
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=199466

Abandon All Hope thread
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=199504


Well I got a note from a mod but when I asked him to explain the "why" he couldn't and pointed me to the 3 admins. I'm not sure what to make of this, but I suspect that they just didn't spend long thinking about it. This was a 2 minute decision not a long term one.
CD-Host
 
Posts: 210
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 12:33 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Sarah » Mon Feb 07, 2011 1:35 pm

One of the MODs responded on how to get some feedback. Anyone who was suspended should file an appeal. Or they could start a thread specifically for that topic.


MOD:
If any of those who received infractions or suspensions feel that they were undeserved, they may appeal, or start a thread specifically dealing with their problem. In feedback threads, once the issue in the OP is looked at we do not follow the thread to make sure we deal with every enquiry raised.
User avatar
Sarah
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3542
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 11:23 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby kindlekitten » Mon Feb 07, 2011 1:42 pm

Sarah wrote:One of the MODs responded on how to get some feedback. Anyone who was suspended should file an appeal. Or they could start a thread specifically for that topic.


MOD:
If any of those who received infractions or suspensions feel that they were undeserved, they may appeal, or start a thread specifically dealing with their problem. In feedback threads, once the issue in the OP is looked at we do not follow the thread to make sure we deal with every enquiry raised.


isn't it rather difficult to file an appeal if you are under a ban?
kindlekitten
 
Posts: 519
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:04 am
Location: the Olympic Peninsula of Washington State

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Justinian » Mon Feb 07, 2011 2:21 pm

kindlekitten wrote:
Sarah wrote:One of the MODs responded on how to get some feedback. Anyone who was suspended should file an appeal. Or they could start a thread specifically for that topic.


MOD:
If any of those who received infractions or suspensions feel that they were undeserved, they may appeal, or start a thread specifically dealing with their problem. In feedback threads, once the issue in the OP is looked at we do not follow the thread to make sure we deal with every enquiry raised.


isn't it rather difficult to file an appeal if you are under a ban?


I always appeal, but nothing happens. Now I'm suspended and can't start a thread or make posts. All I can do is message a mod with a PM.

My suspension is up on the 9th, so there isn't much of a problem there.
The problem is that I'm on probation. One more warning and I'm out for months.
Is it ignorance or apathy? Hey, I don’t know and I don’t care. -- Jimmy Buffett
Anti-intellectualism is plausibly anger against those that undermine ones' biases.
User avatar
Justinian
 
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:51 am
Location: European American

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby CD-Host » Mon Feb 07, 2011 4:07 pm

Sarah wrote:One of the MODs responded on how to get some feedback. Anyone who was suspended should file an appeal. Or they could start a thread specifically for that topic.

MOD:
If any of those who received infractions or suspensions feel that they were undeserved, they may appeal, or start a thread specifically dealing with their problem. In feedback threads, once the issue in the OP is looked at we do not follow the thread to make sure we deal with every enquiry raised.


What are the grounds for an appeal? Who I would I file with, Draca is the head admin isnt' he?
CD-Host
 
Posts: 210
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 12:33 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Sarah » Mon Feb 07, 2011 4:24 pm

CD-Host wrote:
Sarah wrote:One of the MODs responded on how to get some feedback. Anyone who was suspended should file an appeal. Or they could start a thread specifically for that topic.

MOD:
If any of those who received infractions or suspensions feel that they were undeserved, they may appeal, or start a thread specifically dealing with their problem. In feedback threads, once the issue in the OP is looked at we do not follow the thread to make sure we deal with every enquiry raised.


What are the grounds for an appeal? Who I would I file with, Draca is the head admin isnt' he?


No. Darat is the Head Mod.

They posted this link on how to file an appeal:

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p= ... ostcount=9
User avatar
Sarah
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3542
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 11:23 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Chris C » Mon Feb 07, 2011 6:22 pm

File an appeal? The fact that people got suspended for what they call, "custom infractions", just means that those people got suspended for no reason. They couldn't find a reason that was against the rules to suspend them. So they made up their own custom reason to do it.
Chris C
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 4:05 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby CD-Host » Mon Feb 07, 2011 6:38 pm

Sarah wrote:No. Darat is the Head Mod.


Oh wow sorry for that mix up .... you understand what happened there mentally? That's what I meant....
CD-Host
 
Posts: 210
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 12:33 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Chris C » Mon Feb 07, 2011 8:36 pm

Yeah I finally got a response. That eventhough some feel the post I replied to was on topic, their view is its off topic. So since I replied to the post, I'm in violation of attempting to derail the thread. Therefore since its my 2nd warning since becoming a member, my 30 day suspension was warranted.
Chris C
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 4:05 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Kaosium » Tue Feb 08, 2011 12:50 am

Jazz wrote:I think the mass suspensions/bannings were not done out of malice but probably out of a combination of inexperienced mods and an overzealous admin. Seeing the kind of posts that were moved to AAH while other ones were left in the thread, and seeing the kind of posts that were given yellow cards makes me think it was a newbie Mod who did the cull, and reading Darat's "explanations" makes me think that the whole thing is just a big screwup but Darat won't back down because he doesn't want to lose face or something.


I betcha I know what happened. They banned Michael for something petty as they weren't going to give anyone with his history any leeway, and the rest of them either sucided by mod or boycotted. That left Alt practically alone and some were kinda picking on her, and she kinda asked for it, being grumpy almost all by herself. Lionking whose been trolling that thread for a while and making trouble saw an opportunity and he and Treehorn went over to pick a fight with Bruce. And me, I wasn't blameless but at least I tried to engage them and be funny about it. Oh, well.

The report button got pressed on basically everything and Darat woke up to find a couple dozen 'reports' in his inbox and got pissed and thought 'Those damn Knoxers! I'm gonna fix 'em once and for all!' He freaks and closes the thread. At the same time Stilicho and maybe Lionking, as longtime JREFers took advantage of the fact that Darat is clueless about the debate and cried to them as 'real' members and how we're always so mean and we break all the rules, and Darat bought it and decided to teach us 'outsiders' a lesson.

They go through the thread and see the little cockroach fight, the little bus fight, and they decide to punish us for good, once and for all. They looked for anything that could *possibly* be an infraction, and put it in AAH, then just handed out cards to the list lazily, not realizing how moronic it made them look. We complained as they made fools of themselves, but they stuck to their guns as they were sick and tired of reports from the Amanda Knox thread.
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
User avatar
Kaosium
Moderator
 
Posts: 838
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:39 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Withnail1969 » Tue Feb 08, 2011 3:46 am

Kaosium wrote:
Jazz wrote:I think the mass suspensions/bannings were not done out of malice but probably out of a combination of inexperienced mods and an overzealous admin. Seeing the kind of posts that were moved to AAH while other ones were left in the thread, and seeing the kind of posts that were given yellow cards makes me think it was a newbie Mod who did the cull, and reading Darat's "explanations" makes me think that the whole thing is just a big screwup but Darat won't back down because he doesn't want to lose face or something.


I betcha I know what happened. They banned Michael for something petty as they weren't going to give anyone with his history any leeway, and the rest of them either sucided by mod or boycotted. That left Alt practically alone and some were kinda picking on her, and she kinda asked for it, being grumpy almost all by herself.


ALT+F4 is the biggest troll on that thread. She brings the same refuted guilter talking points up repeatedly. I believe her primary goal is to get people to lose their tempers and get suspended or banned.
User avatar
Withnail1969
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:12 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Kaosium » Tue Feb 08, 2011 4:26 am

Withnail1969 wrote:
Kaosium wrote:
Jazz wrote:I think the mass suspensions/bannings were not done out of malice but probably out of a combination of inexperienced mods and an overzealous admin. Seeing the kind of posts that were moved to AAH while other ones were left in the thread, and seeing the kind of posts that were given yellow cards makes me think it was a newbie Mod who did the cull, and reading Darat's "explanations" makes me think that the whole thing is just a big screwup but Darat won't back down because he doesn't want to lose face or something.


I betcha I know what happened. They banned Michael for something petty as they weren't going to give anyone with his history any leeway, and the rest of them either sucided by mod or boycotted. That left Alt practically alone and some were kinda picking on her, and she kinda asked for it, being grumpy almost all by herself.


ALT+F4 is the biggest troll on that thread. She brings the same refuted guilter talking points up repeatedly. I believe her primary goal is to get people to lose their tempers and get suspended or banned.


Not quite, in my mind. She does change positions too, she just does so glacially. You'll note she's not trying to pretend there's much physical evidence of murder, there's no bloody footprint nonsense from her, or trying to pretend the mixed blood/DNA in the sink is evidence of murder. None of that 'staged break-in' silliness either She's making the 'Scott Peterson argument' now, which is one that we should try to defeat as it will certainly occur to other people, I just can't really as I don't know a damn thing about his situation. I don't actually follow murder cases, and the last time Fuji made me look into one it was the Spader butchery and I just wanted to throw up on my keyboard. Gawd, did you read about that guy? :shock:

She's not reading from any script, she's just trying to poke holes anywhere she can find them, as I think she finds our (sometimes) smug certainty annoying. However, when she goes too far, as she often does like with the buses last week, she serves to illustrate just how far a guilt proponent must reach in this debate. I found that instructive when lurking myself. Sometimes, however, she also does make a good point, and other times provokes really good arguments because she can irritate people into action and shoving links down her throat. If she didn't exist, we would have had to invent her.

However, I do understand the desire to reach through the screen and throttle her senseless sometimes! Instead I give her one of my really long posts to blow off steam. :P
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
User avatar
Kaosium
Moderator
 
Posts: 838
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 5:39 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Withnail1969 » Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:33 am

Kaosium wrote:
ALT+F4 is the biggest troll on that thread. She brings the same refuted guilter talking points up repeatedly. I believe her primary goal is to get people to lose their tempers and get suspended or banned.


Not quite, in my mind. She does change positions too, she just does so glacially. You'll note she's not trying to pretend there's much physical evidence of murder, there's no bloody footprint nonsense from her, or trying to pretend the mixed blood/DNA in the sink is evidence of murder. None of that 'staged break-in' silliness either She's making the 'Scott Peterson argument' now, which is one that we should try to defeat as it will certainly occur to other people, I just can't really as I don't know a damn thing about his situation. I don't actually follow murder cases, and the last time Fuji made me look into one it was the Spader butchery and I just wanted to throw up on my keyboard. Gawd, did you read about that guy? :shock:

She's not reading from any script, she's just trying to poke holes anywhere she can find them, as I think she finds our (sometimes) smug certainty annoying. However, when she goes too far, as she often does like with the buses last week, she serves to illustrate just how far a guilt proponent must reach in this debate. I found that instructive when lurking myself. Sometimes, however, she also does make a good point, and other times provokes really good arguments because she can irritate people into action and shoving links down her throat. If she didn't exist, we would have had to invent her.

However, I do understand the desire to reach through the screen and throttle her senseless sometimes! Instead I give her one of my really long posts to blow off steam. :P


She's a pretty obnoxious woman, and she doesn't seem to be very bright, let alone display any attributes of 'skepticism'. It's unfortunate that she latched on to the Knox thread as her main topic of choice at JREF. Unfortunate for me, anyway, since she got me banned.
User avatar
Withnail1969
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:12 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Chris C » Tue Feb 08, 2011 8:37 am

There wasn't much evidence in the Peterson case.
1. He went fishing on the day of his wife's disappearance at the location her body and baby were later found.
2. A single possible hair belonging to his wife in a pair of pliars in the boat.
3. He had a girlfriend that claims he told her his wife died 15 days before she disappeared.

Everything else in the case was how he acted after Lacy's murder.

However, the lack of evidence are the only 2 things that the Knox case and Peterson case have in common. The prosecutors didn't go after multiple people in the peterson case. They also didn't convict different people at different ToD's. The prosecutors didn't claim a satanic cult killed Lacy. Instead in the Peterson case it was the defense that claimed a Satanic cult killed Lacy. Peterson tried to flee the country, Knox stayed.
Chris C
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 4:05 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Justinian » Tue Feb 08, 2011 1:23 pm

Chris C wrote:There wasn't much evidence in the Peterson case.
1. He went fishing on the day of his wife's disappearance at the location her body and baby were later found.
2. A single possible hair belonging to his wife in a pair of pliars in the boat.
3. He had a girlfriend that claims he told her his wife died 15 days before she disappeared.

Everything else in the case was how he acted after Lacy's murder.

However, the lack of evidence are the only 2 things that the Knox case and Peterson case have in common. The prosecutors didn't go after multiple people in the peterson case. They also didn't convict different people at different ToD's. The prosecutors didn't claim a satanic cult killed Lacy. Instead in the Peterson case it was the defense that claimed a Satanic cult killed Lacy. Peterson tried to flee the country, Knox stayed.


Right. Unlike the Peterson case, another (Guede) was found guilty with ample evidence. Since a person can't be murdered twice, the prosecution had to create a completely imaginary conspiracy that violates common sense, logic and evidence in every way in order to convict Amanda and Raffaele.

The prosecution just leaped over a HUGE mountain (facts necessary to connect A & R to Guede, the murder room and a motive) and just continued the prosecution - without making the connection - on presumption, fantasy and fabrication.

In the early days of justice, bearing false witness would bring the same punishment to the false witness as the person being tried. For that reason, we should be prosecuting the prosecution and Italy by now!
Is it ignorance or apathy? Hey, I don’t know and I don’t care. -- Jimmy Buffett
Anti-intellectualism is plausibly anger against those that undermine ones' biases.
User avatar
Justinian
 
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:51 am
Location: European American

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Justinian » Thu Feb 10, 2011 11:03 am

Withnail1969 made this post to me shortly before he was banned.

Allo Guvnor, sorry to 'ear you 'ad a pork sword up the Prince Albert. Wot's 'appened to the Knox thread, me old mucker? Seems to be shut.


It was a really funny reply to something I said earlier. I appreciate the humor, anyway.
Is it ignorance or apathy? Hey, I don’t know and I don’t care. -- Jimmy Buffett
Anti-intellectualism is plausibly anger against those that undermine ones' biases.
User avatar
Justinian
 
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:51 am
Location: European American

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby CD-Host » Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:02 pm

Kaosium wrote:They go through the thread and see the little cockroach fight, the little bus fight, and they decide to punish us for good, once and for all. They looked for anything that could *possibly* be an infraction, and put it in AAH, then just handed out cards to the list lazily, not realizing how moronic it made them look. We complained as they made fools of themselves, but they stuck to their guns as they were sick and tired of reports from the Amanda Knox thread.


Which is very on topic because it is a perfect example of how the powerful end up ignoring the law and feeling justified about it. Darat with guns is how the danziger bridge shooting happens.
CD-Host
 
Posts: 210
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 12:33 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby RoseMontague » Fri Feb 11, 2011 8:07 am

Darat finally responded to my second example of how the suspensions were in violation of the very Membership Agreement the suspensions were enforcing. His response amounted to he could do whatever he wanted to because he was both the Admin and the Forum Liason. Enough for me and I am out of there.
User avatar
RoseMontague
 
Posts: 3526
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 7:04 am

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Justinian » Fri Feb 11, 2011 8:22 am

RoseMontague wrote:Darat finally responded to my second example of how the suspensions were in violation of the very Membership Agreement the suspensions were enforcing. His response amounted to he could do whatever he wanted to because he was both the Admin and the Forum Liason. Enough for me and I am out of there.


Darat is interested in the forum. Probably none of us ever contributed monetarily to the forum. We may have even caused some of the contributing cockroaches to leave by shining light into their dark corner.

We are focused on aiding Amanda and diminishing the injustices that put her in her situation.

It's amazing the power weilded by some of the Perugian cockroaches (an allegory to the little liars in Perugia that scatter when exposed to the light).
Is it ignorance or apathy? Hey, I don’t know and I don’t care. -- Jimmy Buffett
Anti-intellectualism is plausibly anger against those that undermine ones' biases.
User avatar
Justinian
 
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:51 am
Location: European American

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Chris C » Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:22 pm

http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/abo ... ation.html

James Randi Educational Foundation
2941 Fairview Park Drive Suite 105
Falls Church, VA 22042
U.S.A.
phone: +1 703 226 3780
fax: +1 703 226 3781

You can also start sending James Randi emails to see if you get a response.
Chris C
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 4:05 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Dan O. » Fri Feb 11, 2011 11:25 pm

James Randy stepped down from the head position at JREF some time ago. Phil Plait (The Bad Astronomer) took over for a while but now somebody else is at the helm. In any case, I don't think they will give much interest to squabbles from disgruntled forum members. The only outcome I've seen in the past from such activity is banishment from the forums and sometimes a letter from their attorney that they keep on retainer.


ETA: D.J. Grothe is the current president (*)
... and remember that you can never assume that you are completely anonymous or that you cannot be identified by your online comments. -- (from the ISF membership agreement)
Dan O.
 
Posts: 1059
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 12:57 am
Location: Home is where I hug my cat

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby Sarah » Sat Feb 12, 2011 1:08 am

The Mods response to complaints have been utterly disappointing.
User avatar
Sarah
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3542
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 11:23 pm

Re: Banned From JREF

Postby tabjustice » Sat Feb 12, 2011 9:49 am

I admire those who put up such a strong resistance to the lies and disinformation that the anti-Knox posters have been spouting on the JREF forums. I follow the threads occasionally and was tempted to join at one time, but that fit passed a while ago. The quality of argument from the anti-Knox posters in particular has been inconsistent and I would be banned in a heartbeat responding to some.

The posts speak for themselves over there. If the moderators do not wish to moderate fairly, they harm the forum. Frankly, I didn't know it even existed until comments from Perugia Shock peaked my curiosity. If it's not run fairly, the people they are trying to engage will stop visiting. Maybe that will get them to reconsider how it's being run.
User avatar
tabjustice
 
Posts: 304
Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 8:35 am
Location: Washington, DC USA

Life is not fair

Postby Dan O. » Sat Feb 12, 2011 10:54 am

I believe that JREF envisions the forums as a training ground for future skeptics. Part of their goal is to promote civil dialog even in the face of absolute nut cases. It's not against the rules for instance to be crazy or to outright lie but it is against the rules to say someone is crazy or call them a liar. You have to instead show that what they said is crazy or a specific statement is a lie. And you have to do it in a civil and polite way. This is not an easy lesson to learn for many that are used to the typical juvenile name calling that passes for argument on other forums.

When the second continuation thread was started, Darat tried to control some of the pervasive bickering through the silent coup of simply changing the title of the thread thereby severely limiting the scope of discussion allowed in the thread. At the time the thread was last closed, there was over two pages of chat that had little if anything to do with the case. What appears to have happened then is Darat closed the thread and asked the Mod team to clean it up and issue infractions.

I do believe they went overboard on the infractions but that was just following Darat's order. By the time this settles down, many (but not all) of the infractions will probably be reversed. The greatest casualty though will be the thread itself. JREF offered a unique venue where both sides could present and argue their case with unbiased moderation to keep the discussion civil. You cannot replace that with any forum run by either side.
... and remember that you can never assume that you are completely anonymous or that you cannot be identified by your online comments. -- (from the ISF membership agreement)
Dan O.
 
Posts: 1059
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 12:57 am
Location: Home is where I hug my cat

Next

Return to Injustice in Perugia Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

cron