Certainly the line that "I'll say what I like ( free speech or whatever ) so if you don't like it too bad - and why aren't you ignoring me?" will fly like a lead balloon with my policy style.
I'm very pleased to hear you say that. Though I have absolutely nothing personal against the mods there, I have to say that the tight clamp placed on those boards lately comes too late for me. I, too, enjoyed the benefits of a loose hold and the variety of individuals such policies seem to have attracted. But I don't think I'm alone when I say that certain issues require that the boot heel comes down fast, hard and with a loud voice from the powers that be. If that had been the case I would still be enjoying the society there.
Quote:
( edit ) I see you're a 'fora' man too. We were discussing that on another thread - it depends on your dictionary it seems. :-)
Actually, I usually just use the term "boards", but it is an interesting discussion.
Regards and good morning,
Jim
Those who don’t build must burn. It’s as old as history and juvenile delinquents.
Ray Bradbury - Fahrenheit 451
I was saddest to see that a certain individual who was overtly and happily a racist was never actively modded in the "other" boards. >snip<
For this reason I remain absent from SETI's fora and will do so until an apology is issued. I do not anticipate that any such apology will ever be published. Until then, SETI will get no more of my spare cycles. Nor any of the cycles of my dedicated machines.
Outraged it needed to come to such a plain statement of facts,
Freedom of speech applies generally even when you find it distasteful. Individual sensibilities generally aren't taken into account in public forums because frankly, they are innumerable.
Whatever you think of BrainSmashR's posts, the link was there for you to use and then discard as you wish.
As far as, "Ignored bigotry is allowed bigotry. There can be no debate against this assertion." Sure there can.
Imagine that we are designing a restaurant. This restaurant will serve steak. Because we are going to be serving steak, we will have steak knives for the customers. Because the customers will have steak knives, they might stab each other. Therefore, we conclude, we need to put each table into separate metal cages, to prevent the possibility of people stabbing each other.
What would such an approach do to our civil society? What does it do to human kindness, benevolence, and a positive sense of community?
When we reject this design for restaurants, and then when, inevitably, someone does get stabbed in a restaurant (it does happen), do we write long editorials to the papers complaining that "The steakhouse is inviting it by not only allowing irresponsible vandals to stab anyone they please, but by also providing the weapons"?
No, instead we acknowledge that the verb "to allow" does not apply in such a situation. A restaurant is not allowing something just because they haven't taken measures to forcibly prevent it a priori. It is surely against the rules of the restaurant, and of course against the laws of society. If someone starts doing bad things in a restaurant, they are forcibly kicked out and, if it's particularly bad, the law can be called. I do not accept the spin that SETI@Home "allows anyone to write anything" just because we do not metaphysically prevent it by putting authors in cages. There are an infinite number of distasteful ideas out there--no human can rationally crusade against them all. That doesn't mean those people are "allowing" other people distasteful ideas, the verb doesn't apply.
Cordially,
Rush
elrushbo-[at]-theobviousadelphia.net
Remove the obvious...
I was saddest to see that a certain individual who was overtly and happily a racist was never actively modded in the "other" boards. >snip<
For this reason I remain absent from SETI's fora and will do so until an apology is issued. I do not anticipate that any such apology will ever be published. Until then, SETI will get no more of my spare cycles. Nor any of the cycles of my dedicated machines.
Outraged it needed to come to such a plain statement of facts,
Freedom of speech applies generally even when you find it distasteful. Individual sensibilities generally aren't taken into account in public forums because frankly, they are innumerable.
Whatever you think of BrainSmashR's posts, the link was there for you to use and then discard as you wish.
As far as, "Ignored bigotry is allowed bigotry. There can be no debate against this assertion." Sure there can.
Imagine that we are designing a restaurant. This restaurant will serve steak. Because we are going to be serving steak, we will have steak knives for the customers. Because the customers will have steak knives, they might stab each other. Therefore, we conclude, we need to put each table into separate metal cages, to prevent the possibility of people stabbing each other.
What would such an approach do to our civil society? What does it do to human kindness, benevolence, and a positive sense of community?
When we reject this design for restaurants, and then when, inevitably, someone does get stabbed in a restaurant (it does happen), do we write long editorials to the papers complaining that "The steakhouse is inviting it by not only allowing irresponsible vandals to stab anyone they please, but by also providing the weapons"?
No, instead we acknowledge that the verb "to allow" does not apply in such a situation. A restaurant is not allowing something just because they haven't taken measures to forcibly prevent it a priori. It is surely against the rules of the restaurant, and of course against the laws of society. If someone starts doing bad things in a restaurant, they are forcibly kicked out and, if it's particularly bad, the law can be called. I do not accept the spin that SETI@Home "allows anyone to write anything" just because we do not metaphysically prevent it by putting authors in cages. There are an infinite number of distasteful ideas out there--no human can rationally crusade against them all. That doesn't mean those people are "allowing" other people distasteful ideas, the verb doesn't apply.
Well, I'm sorry I didn't follow most of that commentary on SETI.:-)
Not to worry though, as long as it's clearly known that E@H says this:
"Please be responsible in what you write, and do not create posts which are offensive or insulting. Offensive posts or threads may be deleted by project managers without warning or discussion. Do not respond to offensive postings. Click on the 'report offensive post' button at the bottom of the post to call it to the attention of the project managers."
I can, have and will continue to apply that.
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
Well, I'm sorry I didn't follow most of that commentary on SETI.:-)
Oh man, you didn't miss a thing, Mike. I don't read half the threads over there and I can't imagine what I missed.
I'd've guessed that the SETI boards would be full of fascinating speculation, and contain lots of discussions on search methodologies and technologies. Is there nothing positive about the project's boards?
Rush, you weren't around when the perp was doing his thing. Not only was his posts nasty and hatefilled but he would even change his username to several vulgarities insulting specific mods. Then when he recently came back he tried to act all innocent and play on the sympathies of those who weren't around previously.
Right, well, I guess you can count me in as a refugee of SETI, as well. Actually, refugee may be too strong a word, as I intend to kick and scream and fight 'til the bitter end, but, at any rate, I've seen how my meagre efforts at adding to the SETI community have been taken, without so much as an acknowledgement, so, here I am for some therapy.
Right, well, I guess you can count me in as a refugee of SETI, as well. Actually, refugee may be too strong a word, as I intend to kick and scream and fight 'til the bitter end, but, at any rate, I've seen how my meagre efforts at adding to the SETI community have been taken, without so much as an acknowledgement, so, here I am for some therapy.
The straw that broke the camel's back was being branded a "rogue" for posting in the recruiting thread that I started. Makes you feel like you've amde a contribution, doesn't it? But thank you for the welcome.
Good Morning! Good Afternoon!
)
Good Morning! Good Afternoon! Goodnight!
RE: Certainly the line that
)
I'm very pleased to hear you say that. Though I have absolutely nothing personal against the mods there, I have to say that the tight clamp placed on those boards lately comes too late for me. I, too, enjoyed the benefits of a loose hold and the variety of individuals such policies seem to have attracted. But I don't think I'm alone when I say that certain issues require that the boot heel comes down fast, hard and with a loud voice from the powers that be. If that had been the case I would still be enjoying the society there.
Actually, I usually just use the term "boards", but it is an interesting discussion.
Regards and good morning,
Jim
Those who don’t build must burn. It’s as old as history and juvenile delinquents.
Ray Bradbury - Fahrenheit 451
RE: I was saddest to see
)
Freedom of speech applies generally even when you find it distasteful. Individual sensibilities generally aren't taken into account in public forums because frankly, they are innumerable.
Whatever you think of BrainSmashR's posts, the link was there for you to use and then discard as you wish.
As far as, "Ignored bigotry is allowed bigotry. There can be no debate against this assertion." Sure there can.
Imagine that we are designing a restaurant. This restaurant will serve steak. Because we are going to be serving steak, we will have steak knives for the customers. Because the customers will have steak knives, they might stab each other. Therefore, we conclude, we need to put each table into separate metal cages, to prevent the possibility of people stabbing each other.
What would such an approach do to our civil society? What does it do to human kindness, benevolence, and a positive sense of community?
When we reject this design for restaurants, and then when, inevitably, someone does get stabbed in a restaurant (it does happen), do we write long editorials to the papers complaining that "The steakhouse is inviting it by not only allowing irresponsible vandals to stab anyone they please, but by also providing the weapons"?
No, instead we acknowledge that the verb "to allow" does not apply in such a situation. A restaurant is not allowing something just because they haven't taken measures to forcibly prevent it a priori. It is surely against the rules of the restaurant, and of course against the laws of society. If someone starts doing bad things in a restaurant, they are forcibly kicked out and, if it's particularly bad, the law can be called. I do not accept the spin that SETI@Home "allows anyone to write anything" just because we do not metaphysically prevent it by putting authors in cages. There are an infinite number of distasteful ideas out there--no human can rationally crusade against them all. That doesn't mean those people are "allowing" other people distasteful ideas, the verb doesn't apply.
Cordially,
Rush
elrushbo-[at]-theobviousadelphia.net
Remove the obvious...
RE: RE: I was saddest to
)
Well, I'm sorry I didn't follow most of that commentary on SETI.:-)
Not to worry though, as long as it's clearly known that E@H says this:
"Please be responsible in what you write, and do not create posts which are offensive or insulting. Offensive posts or threads may be deleted by project managers without warning or discussion. Do not respond to offensive postings. Click on the 'report offensive post' button at the bottom of the post to call it to the attention of the project managers."
I can, have and will continue to apply that.
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
RE: Well, I'm sorry I
)
Oh man, you didn't miss a thing, Mike. I don't read half the threads over there and I can't imagine what I missed.
Cordially,
Rush
elrushbo-[at]-theobviousadelphia.net
Remove the obvious...
RE: RE: Well, I'm sorry I
)
I'd've guessed that the SETI boards would be full of fascinating speculation, and contain lots of discussions on search methodologies and technologies. Is there nothing positive about the project's boards?
Rush, you weren't around when
)
Rush, you weren't around when the perp was doing his thing. Not only was his posts nasty and hatefilled but he would even change his username to several vulgarities insulting specific mods. Then when he recently came back he tried to act all innocent and play on the sympathies of those who weren't around previously.
me-[at]-rescam.org
Right, well, I guess you can
)
Right, well, I guess you can count me in as a refugee of SETI, as well. Actually, refugee may be too strong a word, as I intend to kick and scream and fight 'til the bitter end, but, at any rate, I've seen how my meagre efforts at adding to the SETI community have been taken, without so much as an acknowledgement, so, here I am for some therapy.
RE: Right, well, I guess
)
Welcome Raven...I hope we can cheer you up some.
RE: Welcome Raven...I hope
)
The straw that broke the camel's back was being branded a "rogue" for posting in the recruiting thread that I started. Makes you feel like you've amde a contribution, doesn't it? But thank you for the welcome.