|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
 Posted - 04/03/2011 : 20:55:37
|
Originally posted by bngbuck, over here
Alienist said:| I suggest ignoring BngBuck unless he says something that contributes to the topic |
Finally! An appraisal of common sense, truth, and clarity that illuminates the childish fiasco that these forums devolve into almost every time a topic that hints of "woo" is introduced. Whether it is extraterrestrial visititation, alien abduction, psychic phenomena, ghosts, or whatever; these are topics that many "skeptics" just can't handle rationally for very long. |
The last two topics you've been involved with have become childish fiascos only because you decided to be an ass in both of them. Had you refrained, we might still be talking about the things Alexander1304 wanted to talk about.| The topics are so anathematic to the precepts of Critical Thinking that they are seen as taboo by many trained in CT application, and the affect of the subject matter significantly hinders the exercise of rationality when thinking about the subject. Frequently, the discussion degrades into personal attack and argument ad hominem (which I understand to be a logical fallacy.) |
When you involve yourself, yes.
(By the way, if you can find one example of argumentum ad hominem in its logical fallacy form that came from one of the regulars here, I would be surprised.)| Perhaps all such topics should be banned here, because several of the members obviously cannot handle such material. |
Perhaps you should be banned here, since several of the members obviously can't stand you.| Another approach would be to ban any person or member that dares to introduce such a topic. |
It's never happened before, I sure don't plan to start now.| That seems to work, at least it kills the topic thread - as in Le Penseur's case. |
le Penseur wasn't banned for talking about UFOs. He was suspended for boldly declaring that he was engaging in illegal activities on the SFN in clear violation of his user agreement, in a pathetic attempt to get me or Kil to censure people who were merely insulting him for being a jerk. He could have responded as an adult himself or childishly traded insult for insult, and he'd still be here. Instead, he tried to escalate his self-imposed victimhood all the way up to a hate-crime (pissing on brown people and gays along the way) and got himself suspended for the sheer audacity of his hyperbole. By no stretch of the imagination can it be seriously suggested that he got punted because he claimed to have been abducted.| Kil, and even Dave seemed to realize that the robotic calls for Evidence coming from many in the crowd were useless. |
Because le Penseur flatly stated in his OP that they would indeed be useless.| Yet, LP ended up martyring himself (with a lift to the Cross by Dave] and the thread ended. Some expressed relief that it was over. This would seem to bolster the argument that taboo topics be banned in advance. Better ban topics than people. Maybe. |
le Penseur made sure everyone knew how much of a jerk he was in more ways than one. It wasn't the choice of topic that was the problem, it was him.Ooooo, a maverick in the mold of Palin herself.| So, not all of the frequently-posting members' limbic systens go into orbit when a taboo topic shows up. |
Nobody has displayed such behavior yet.| There is absolutely nothing wrong with Critical Thinking. It is just that it is not the end and all of existence. |
Has anyone claimed otherwise?| But I have difficulty in understanding why, when an interesting member like LP comes along, and the "evidence" mantra has been chanted to him many times, and leaders like Kil and Dave have clearly seen that "evidence" is very difficult to obtain; why he must be either manuvered into quitting or else banned (OK, suspended), rather than given a chance to get the emotional need to retaliate to attacks out of his system - and then allowed to talk at length about his topic? |
Two reasons. He wasn't going to talk at length about his topic, because he came here spoiling for a fight and then whined when he got one. He sought martyrdom, and was probably surprised at how long it took (you'll note how many times he "threatened" to leave). Good grief, Michael Mozina is still a member in good standing (even if he chooses not to post here anymore) because even when things got personal, he didn't act like such an uber-twit about it. Or look at Bill scott, FFS. If there's anything more likely to draw insults than climate change denialism, I don't know what it is (because such denialism is a direct threat to all of our progeny), but Bill scott is still here, posting away. And only one of the failed "Total Truth Takeover" 9/11 Truthers got banned, and that was because he decided to take everything personally. There are plenty of counter-examples to your attempted generalization.
But if "attempts at rational discussion" are a synonym (in your mind) for "maneuvered into quitting," then so be it. Most of the people who've been banned or quit did so because we wouldn't let them use the SFN as a soapbox for the public display of whatever personality problems they had. The point of this web site has never been to give people a place "to talk at length about [their] topic[s]." The web is flush with free blog sites with super-simple software at which they can do that, and even control the commentary as they see fit. When they come here instead of just rambling on their own web pages, it's because they either want a challenge or they want a fight. And now you're here complaining about them getting what they wanted.| The member (Alienist) that has suggested to one and all to ignore my off-topic commentary is absolutely correct. Try to direct the more productive functions of the frontal cortex to override the emotional tsunamis of the hypothalamus! Alienist is a highly educated medical specialist in psychiatry, with years of actual patient therapy under her belt. She is a much more capable commentator on psychodynamics than probably anyone here - most particularly me! All I would add to her comment is: Just ignore anyone who is more interested in insult exchange than in pursuing a topic discussion! |
Thus, you try to suggest a fix for that which is not broken, while ignoring (even praising) that which is.
|
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
moakley
SFN Regular
USA
1888 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2011 : 05:48:37 [Permalink]
|
bngbuck strikes me as being too enamored with the language. That his posts, in particular the one referenced, have greater focus on the exhibition of his vocabulary at the expense of useful content. Too often his posts become tedious to read much like reading the dialog of Charlie Brown's teacher.
One more comment. If le Penseur had something interesting to say, then he spent 47 pages not saying it. He was too easily distracted and quick to anger. His greatest failing was his refusal to recognise that if his arguments could not stand up to scrutiny and he was unable to elevate his game, then it was likely that he was wrong about what he believed. Changing ones mind is difficult, but it should not be impossible. |
Life is good
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous |
 |
|
|
Fripp
SFN Regular
USA
727 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2011 : 06:20:24 [Permalink]
|
| I must say that, at first, I didn't understand the utter hatred towards bngbuck. But after witnessing how every thread he posts to becomes a soapbox to air his grievances (especially with Dave W), I can certainly see the source of the irritation. In particular, his grandiose "exit" was melodramatic to the extreme. I'm guilty of derailing some threads myself, but I hope I'm not as bad as he is. |
"What the hell is an Aluminum Falcon?"
"Oh, I'm sorry. I thought my Dark Lord of the Sith could protect a small thermal exhaust port that's only 2-meters wide! That thing wasn't even fully paid off yet! You have any idea what this is going to do to my credit?!?!"
"What? Oh, oh, 'just rebuild it'? Oh, real [bleep]ing original. And who's gonna give me a loan, jackhole? You? You got an ATM on that torso LiteBrite?" |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2011 : 15:15:18 [Permalink]
|
Kil.....
Okay Bill. You have a bug up your ass about le Penseur and other things. Fine. You do know you can start a thread about that, right? This is not the place. I resent your hijacking this thread so you can air your grievances. Open another thread and we'll address your grievances and criticisms there. Can't say how it will go, but at least it will be dedicated.
And Bill. I'm not asking. While I consider you a friend of mine, I consider SFN my baby. |
I hope that I am correct in my understanding of you and Dave that his "Whining and Complaining" titled thread (this one) is the appropiate venue for answering your address to me.
1. Okay Bill. You have a bug up your ass about le Penseur and other things.
Yes.
2. You do know you can start a thread about that, right?
Yes. It did not occur to me when I wrote the subject post.
3. This is not the place.
I certainly do understand now that it is a violation of an unwritten rule of SFN membership. I also understand that it is not commonly enforced, is frequently violated, and its importance should be emphasized to old and new members alike. Some newbies may not even know what "hijacking" is.
4. I resent your hijacking this thread
That is very clear. "Hijacking" did not occur to me at the time and there was no intent to "hijack". In view of the importance of this concept, I feel a reminder should be placed somewhere near the mission statement. Not only myself, but hijackers like Le Penseur might be dissuaded from topic piracy by such a warning.
5. Open another thread
Dave preempted that perogative.
6. so you can air your grievances.
Yes, there was that, but there was also a serious suggestion that Alienist had an excellent take on the situation:| I suggest ignoring BngBuck unless he says something that contributes to the topic |
Skeptic Friends Mission Statement
we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise. |
7. we'll address your grievances and criticisms there.
Well, I truly don't know how beneficial that may be to either SFN, you or me. Do you, really? I have made my opinions pretty clear. As Dave points out, there appears to be very little tolerance of my views, much less consideration. Fripp states:| I must say that, at first, I didn't understand the utter hatred towards bngbuck. But after witnessing how every thread he posts to becomes a soapbox to air his grievances..... |
Fripp may very well be right, the sentiment he names may be the prevailing sentiment toward me and my "whining and complaining." What is your view, David? I feel that it might be prudent for me to refrain from more whining and complaining until receiving more input. Many SFN frequent posters have not expressed their views. Perhaps a poll? In the spirit of demokratia from ancient Athens?
8. Can't say how it will go, but at least it will be dedicated.
My view is that it could go very well if there is restraint on both sides, but might go very poorly if there is not. To me, the overreaching question is: Would it be useful? I invite comment from adversaries and others.
9. While I consider you a friend of mine, I consider SFN my baby.
I had understood that paternal ownership of the child was shared by two others. In any event, if you can allow acceptance of a genuine apology from a scoundrel like me, I truly regret committing child abuse as regards SFN!
10. And Bill. I'm not asking.
And David, you have a perfectly valid proprietary right to demand any behavior you wish from the members of the society of which that you hold significant ownership; as does Dave. But here's the thing. I was drafted into the US Army when I was 26 years old. The preposterous Korean war was raging at that time. I spent two years and many more in the Reserves. All mandatory.
I learned a great deal from the experience, much of it became very useful in the world of commerce. Which I appreciated. However I left the service with a bone-marrow deep aversion to taking orders. I, of course, will abide by your wishes simply because that is what you want. Out of respect. Only.
But I ask you, in a spirit of complete cooperation with your wishes, to please not couch your expression of those wishes to me in the form of an order. I have to also say, that in the many years that I employed a significant number of employees, I never issued a request in the form of an order. Temination included. Nor do I order my wife, my children, or my friends. Even my dogs. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2011 : 17:13:46 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
As Dave points out, there appears to be very little tolerance of my views, much less consideration. |
Well, you've got that backwards. Your views have been considered, and then rejected. (At least on the subjects of opinions and agnosticism, for examples.) And actually, the fact that you repeatedly attribute false views to others despite their protestations indicates that you're the one who's not the least bit considerate. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2011 : 17:24:17 [Permalink]
|
I think you are missing the point Bill.
It is common courtesy to not excessively hijack a thread. Sure, sometimes the things wander all over the place, but sometimes hijacking is disruptive behavior. Like when you have no actual contribution or comment at all about the topic you are posting in, but you use that thread as a platform for something else.
This forum allows off topic posts as long as they aren't disruptive, and that is a good thing I think. Just don't abuse it and there isn't a problem.
Also, you have to admit, you are intentionally being a dick recently.
Specifically to Dave_W and Kil:
Are you sure it is a good idea to start a thread specifically to call out a member of the forum? If you will recall you prevented me from doing this very same thing and issued an official warning of imminent banning if I did it again.
At the time I was a bit pissed off with you for that seemingly arbitrary decision, but after thinking about it for a while (and cooling off) I came to agree with the wisdom of not allowing that level of dickishness into the forums, its a bridge too far. I still agree.
If bngbuck had wanted to start this thread, that is one thing. It would allow him the choice to invite comment. But having another person start it, especially a mod who has explicitly banned this type of behavior from the forums in the past, is prettymuch fucked up.
So consider this my official request for you to lock this thread, apologize for starting it, and allow bngbuck to initiate it if he chooses.
And seriously... WTF (WHAT THE FUCK) is going on here when I am the one who thinks something is excessively hostile and am calling for civility? You have a genuine problem, I think, when I think the infighting has gone too far.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2011 : 17:54:32 [Permalink]
|
Bill:
I certainly do understand now that it is a violation of an unwritten rule of SFN membership. I also understand that it is not commonly enforced, is frequently violated, and its importance should be emphasized to old and new members alike. Some newbies may not even know what "hijacking" is. |
Some threads wonder around and yes, go off topic. They usually get there by stream of consciousness or because there is some related topic of interest. We tend to be very lax about that. But that was not the case with the post that I responded too. Your intent, in THAT post was to air your grievances about ANOTHER thread and this site in general. In my view that was a crummy thing to do to Alexander1304 who started that thread.
Now I’m not blind and I get that BPS and others took a swipes at you, and I didn’t see anything wrong with swiping back if it didn’t get out of hand or become what the thread was becoming. That’s where I draw the line. Call it arbitrary if you like, but I don’t think it is. Your last post had absolutely nothing to do with the topic.
Bill:
But I ask you, in a spirit of complete cooperation with your wishes, to please not couch your expression of those wishes to me in the form of an order. I have to also say, that in the many years that I employed a significant number of employees, I never issued a request in the form of an order. Temination included. Nor do I order my wife, my children, or my friends. Even my dogs. |
Well, it’s too late for me to say please, because the thread has been started. But believe it or not I was using restraint. A part of me wanted to issue an official warning, but I didn’t want to go there. I can’t really order you to do anything Bill. And your participation in this thread is completely up to you.
If you don’t want to participate in this thread, than I agree with Dude. This thread should be locked.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2011 : 18:12:02 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
If you don’t want to participate in this thread, than I agree with Dude. This thread should be locked. |
Actually, I'll go ahead and agree with Dude completely. If bngbuck wants the thread re-opened, he knows how to get in touch with us. If he wants to start another thread on his own terms, he's also free to do that.
I apologize, bngbuck, for my abysmally rude behavior in starting this thread.Originally posted by Dude
If you will recall you prevented me from doing this very same thing and issued an official warning of imminent banning if I did it again. |
Sorry, no, I honestly do not recall this. I'm sure you're right, but please remind me further via PM or email.
[Topic locked] |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Whining and complaining
Topic Locked
