Forum Rules and Guidelines Discussion

Please keep posts here free of details regarding non-psi issues reserved for opt-in forums.

As this is a discussion thread about Moderation, and you have again deleted part of my post I want to make an official complaint against you. 

I want to know who the forum ‘owners’ are. This is new. 

The part you deleted was in answer to Kamarling, and in my view was directly related to the moderation of the opt in forums and what is happening with regard to me. Where else can I talk about the moderation of the subject which has been the basis of bias against me? So far it has been done in private, with no neutral observers - only a bunch of your rules to be obeyed by me have come out in email form. If they are not, I run the risk of being permanently banned by you. It is unfair. 

That you have taken it upon yourself to act as judge, jury and executioner where my posts only are concerned is nothing short of bullying, authoritative and definitely NOT in the spirit in which this forum was founded. 

You have refused to discuss this with me. I have tried to be reasonable, but have been met with a blanket refusal to discuss our behaviour. It’s ironic you know, that I have received most likes for my posts from you (305 - equalled by Typoz, with Laird in third place) over the years. 

I haven’t fundamentally changed over the years in the forum. I wonder what has?

Please keep posts here free of details regarding non-psi issues reserved for opt-in forums.

Yep. I got drawn into that with my comments on free speech ... sorry.

Ninshub,

Reflecting on my time moderating Skeptiko, I would say that if you want to rule a subject as not suitable for this forum, you should do so explicitly - not try to restrict posting in arbitrary ways.

So in particular, if you don't want COVID to be discussed, you should say so, and maybe give a reason for that decision. I  do appreciate that moderating is hard, but at least you don't have Alex who didn't always back me up!

Ninshub,

Reflecting on my time moderating Keptiko, I would say that if you want to rule a subject as not suitable for this forum, you should do so explicitly - not try to restrict posting in arbitrary ways.

So in particular, if you don't want COVID to be discussed, you should say so, and maybe give a reason for that decision. I  do appreciate that moderating is hard, but at least you don't have Alex who didn't always back me up!

I wondered how long it would take you to start interfering in the moderation process and questioning decisions. The wise and experienced old-timer? Or the one who handed out bans like confetti which led, in part, to the founding of this forum and here you are again.

Firstly, and importantly, I am not commenting as a moderator or administrator because I am neither (nor ever have been). I only comment on the moderation policies just like everyone else is entitled to do although I am one of a group of founder members which means I can communicate in private with other founders.

In that case I think it’s time we made things a bit more transparent, clarify exactly your position, because it seems to me like you’re being deceitful here. 

Is it true that you were party to a private discussion between four founder members in which decisions were made concerning me? If so that is definitely playing the part of an admin or moderator in my opinion!  

David001 is a member here, so is entitled to give his viewpoint. Free speech seems extremely low on your list of priorities to me! Where’s Ian now, to keep you in line? What happened to ‘play the ball, not the man’ ? 

Make a choice, either you are an admin, or you’re not! You appear to want it both ways!

[Ninshub]

Ninshub,

I would say that if you want to rule a subject as not suitable for this forum, you should do so explicitly - not try to restrict posting in arbitrary ways.

Restricting posting has not been done in arbitrary ways. If you think this has been the case, please argue the point more precisely.

Bringing up content outside the opt-in forums that belongs to them - of which this thread is a part (that is, outside the opt-in forums) - is not allowed, per the forum rules. That applies to whatever the specific topic is.

[Ninshub]

Where else can I talk about the moderation of the subject which has been the basis of bias against me? 

You have not been restricted in talking about moderation in this thread. The part of your post that was excised was a part where you were going into specific details of content that is reserved for the opt-in forums.

[Ninshub]

That you have taken it upon yourself to act as judge, jury and executioner where my posts only are concerned is nothing short of bullying, authoritative

Perhaps you could let me know where this has taken place, apart from this instance. (The other, very few instances involved what I judged - and yes judging is inherent to the moderator's role - to be verbally abusive behavior and inappropriate personally-directed/revealing content. The bannings to which you have been subjected have been because of verbal abuse). The reason I did not excise any of Kamarling's posts in this same thread was that he didn't go into more specifics regarding opt-in forum content. If I've misread that, point me to the relevant post and I'll excise that as well.

 The reason I did not excise any of Kamarling's posts in this same thread was that he didn't go into more specifics regarding opt-in forum content. If I've misread that, point me to the relevant post and I'll excise that as well.

It is often tempting to respond to provocative posts and I have done so in the past, perhaps where the subject matter should be restricted to the opt-in sections. If so, then you are more than welcome to delete my posts or portions thereof. 

With regard to the discussion on mederation, to accuse you of bullying is more than overstatement, it is just not true. Moderation on this forum, whether by you or Laird, has been - well - moderate (if not lax). As I mentioned above, moderation on Skeptiko tended towards the severe, especially if posts were critical of Alex or the other moderators. It is not unreasonable to apply the rules of this forum when those rules have been devised to prevent this forum from following the Skeptiko example. Remember that this forum was created because Skeptiko became just another angry conspiracy quagmire. 

If the time has come when the opt-in section has become more active than the main forum, then perhaps it is time to call it a day. I don't go there so I can't assess whether that is the case but my impression is that if it were not for Sciborg and a couple of others, this forum would already be dead.

Remember that this forum was created because Skeptiko became just another angry conspiracy quagmire. 

Yes, I remember it very well Dave. 

Openness and transparency and free speech were the order of the day. 

If the time has come when the opt-in section has become more active than the main forum, then perhaps it is time to call it a day. I don't go there so I can't assess whether that is the case but my impression is that if it were not for Sciborg and a couple of others, this forum would already be dead.

It hasn’t become more active than the main forum.

If it wasn’t for your pathetic whining about anti-vaxers (which is allowed to remain on the open forum btw) conspiracy theorists and other ‘controversial’ topics then I possibly wouldn’t be drawn to your posts in this part of the forum and much of this could have been averted. How much of my posting on the opt in forums is the result of my frustration with people like you, who are so dogmatic about certain topics that you put the likes of Krauss, Woerlee and other materialists in the shade.