(2017-09-08, 08:29 AM)Max_B Wrote: [ -> ]If the owners got a take down notice with legal threats, I'd expect them to act in their own interests. I'd hope the takedown notice was provided to people who asked, and that some open discussion took place first, so that people could have time to save content BEFORE it's removed.
But, alas, our lack of a community consensus about it when you posted that led to growing pains. I suggest that you push this as a solution instead of debating if what you implied was outright fraud or just omission to bias the results.
Also, we should probably set a line between our sysops and Alex, who in his latter days had no issues implying some pretty devious things about the subjects of his conspiracies (see Lieutenant Aquinas, for example). At least we get to discuss what happens.
(2017-09-08, 08:37 AM)Doppelgänger Wrote: [ -> ]I didn’t agree with your comments on that thread, Max. But I know you did not outright say that Radin was engaging in fraud, and I didn’t think your comments even remotely rose to defamation or libel. (However, I do think you are being quite stubborn! But that is just my personal opinion.)
I hope you don’t give up on the forum just yet. At least we are having these discussions about moderation out in the open, something that was tried, but always seemed to be fail, on the SF.
I think we should be able to speculate about people’s motives in research, like whether it’s intentional, due to (unconscious) bias, or just because of a big, old blind spot. I just read about a study yesterday that infuriated me (had nothing to do with psi or the paranormal), and I would definitely speculate on its flaws, conclusions, possibly intentional obfuscation in its conclusions and subsequent promotion in the media.
I also agree that those who post here who work in the field should not be treated like celebrities; they should be treated respectfully, just like any other forum poster. I think we should strive for civility in all discussions, even when things are heated, though I do allow that people sometimes lose their tempers from time to time, too.
I don't know... Max later emphasizing that "IONS is all about meditation" does imply that the original comment assumes that Radin was actively pushing to get a positive result in favor of the meditators or that he omitted information... Either of which would be something worse than just incompetence. In any case, that particular comment wasn't a "challenge", unlike his long-as-hell argument about sound, it was a comment on character.
(2017-09-08, 08:52 AM)Max_B Wrote: [ -> ]It's early days yet... their full nature is not yet out... lol... now that they have been granted power...
We were able to tell that something was wrong with Craig Weiler when he was given a little power and that was fast. And, I'm sure that Alex was the one responsible for taking Dave to the dark side by heavily politicizing everything... He didn't treat us as children early on.
(2017-09-08, 08:16 AM)E. Flowers Wrote: [ -> ]the administration should include a disclaimer to avoid getting dragged into a libel action
My research indicates that forum administrators/owners (in the USA, which is where our forum is hosted) are not liable for the defamatory remarks of their members, so this is not a problem.
(2017-09-08, 08:59 AM)E. Flowers Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know... Max later emphasizing that "IONS is all about meditation" does imply that the original comment assumes that Radin was actively pushing to get a positive result in favor of the meditators or that he omitted information... Either of which would be something worse than just incompetence. In any case, that particular comment wasn't a "challenge", unlike his long-as-hell argument about sound, it was a comment on character.
Just to get it out of the way, I thought his sound argument was ridiculous.
So you are using a string of posts to point to his intention/motive? Did he make a complete post that outright said that Radin was engaging in fraud?
Also, I reserve the right to criticize studies that have questionable backers, or what I suspect is propaganda masquerading as scientific studies when it's tied to, say, big pharmaceutical or agricultural companies/industries.
I think we should hold psi/paranormal researchers and studies to the same standard. I know it's tempting to cut them some slack because they are so marginalized. But I also don't believe in the "extraordinary claims" argument from skeptics (and current scientific climate) either. They should all be held to the same standard.
(2017-09-08, 09:08 AM)Laird Wrote: [ -> ]My research indicates that forum administrators/owners (in the USA, which is where our forum is hosted) are not liable for the defamatory remarks of their members, so this is not a problem.
That hasn't stopped people from filling lawsuits against Topix and actions being taken to unmask individual users.
(2017-09-08, 09:08 AM)Laird Wrote: [ -> ]My research indicates that forum administrators/owners (in the USA, which is where our forum is hosted) are not liable for the defamatory remarks of their members, so this is not a problem.
Having Googled it, I see what you mean. It's interesting, because the situation seems to be very different in the UK.
(2017-09-08, 09:13 AM)Doppelgänger Wrote: [ -> ]Just to get it out of the way, I thought his sound argument was ridiculous.
So you are using a string of posts to point to his intention/motive? Did he make a complete post that outright said that Radin was engaging in fraud?
Also, I reserve the right to criticize studies that have questionable backers, or what I suspect is propaganda masquerading as scientific studies when its tied to, say, big pharmaceutical or agricultural companies/industries.
I think we should hold psi/paranormal researchers and studies to the same standard. I know it's tempting to cut them some slack because they are so marginalized. But I also don't believe in the "extraordinary claims" argument from skeptics (and current scientific climate) either. They should all be held to the same standard.
Of course, all of them dealt with the same issue (it was a diatribe), it's not like I took the other one from a different thread and placed it there out of context.
And no, I'm not advocating that we should cut researchers some slack, but when Max goes after someone, he doesn't seem to care about measuring himself. Remember the Diane Powell incident (in particular the part when he went to her website). I think that he pushed the envelope back then, especially because she had already admitted that the entire thing was preliminary and flawed, and now he was going that way again before seeing the researcher here and being pushed into focusing more on the methodological.
(2017-09-08, 09:21 AM)E. Flowers Wrote: [ -> ]That hasn't stopped people from filling lawsuits against Topix and actions being taken to unmask individual users.
Anyone can file a lawsuit. There has to be a compelling reason for a judge to subpoena records to, as you say, unmask individual users. (However, this doesn't matter when it comes to actions by the deep state, but we can't talk about that here yet
).
(2017-09-08, 09:26 AM)Max_B Wrote: [ -> ]Exactly my point... Bailey turned into a tyrant over a period of time, others turned faster as you say. But Skeptiko certainly had a honeymoon period... which then staggered back and forth under the control of different governors... and eventually ended in rebellion.
Skeptiko had viceroys that monitored the lands that the emperor had forsaken to be festered on by, well,
us. That system never works in online communities, you only end up with suck-ups and people that do their best just to avoid the authorities (Wikipedia's fascination with its otherwise unremarkable founder, Jimbo Wales, and his disconnection to all but an arbitration committee is another example). So, naturally, when the emperor went mad and the viceroys chose sides, the dissolution of the community soon followed.