|
Post by StuartG on Sept 17, 2010 13:28:43 GMT 1
Helen, I personally would prefer You to re-consider. "I'm a science teacher and I cannot be party to this." A party to what, no-one is asking You to agree, any more than we had to agree on the Beeb. Perhaps we all expect too much from such a new board. How about researching the 'Pioneer Anomaly' no-one has answered the problem yet. That is science, and You've no-need to go near any 'AGW' discussions. Respectfully, StuartG
|
|
|
Post by jonjel on Sept 17, 2010 13:52:12 GMT 1
[Although I publically called for the removal of Lazarus due to his continued posting of eco-propaganda and rejection of all evidence except peer reviewed papers, I feel he should have been given a warning or two first. A suspension perhaps. He could have been restricted to opening a couple of threads per day and sanctioned if he didn't debate them fully and with fair intent. I don't want to see people being banned unless they have committed a serious "crime". We don't want the eco-brigade to think this board is biased in any way. We'll leave cencorship and bias to the experts - them. ]
That in itself gives us a clear indication of your own bias, so why should you call for the banning of someone who might be biased in an opposite direction?
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Sept 17, 2010 14:00:40 GMT 1
"That in itself gives us a clear indication of your own bias, so why should you call for the banning of someone who might be biased in an opposite direction?" What are you talking about? Re-read the above and think about how ridiculous that statement is please.
|
|
|
Post by jonjel on Sept 17, 2010 14:12:30 GMT 1
[We don't want the eco-brigade to think this board is biased in any way. We'll leave cencorship and bias to the experts - them. ]
You said the above, and it seems pretty clear to me.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Sept 17, 2010 14:29:41 GMT 1
I am obviously biased. Everyone is. They have their viewpoint. This should be obvious. The point I made refers to the board. The moderation should be un-biased.
Unlike the defunct BBC board.
|
|
|
Post by jonjel on Sept 17, 2010 14:37:32 GMT 1
[The moderation should be un-biased.]
And with that I agree.
Coming back to Lazarus, I read a couple of threads 'cover to cover' where he was an active contributor.
I found none of his posts offensive, though others were personally offensive to him.
He simply had a different viewpoint, and if he has been banned because of that, and because of your acknowledged complaint Mr Smith then I doubt I will be coming back here that often.
Perhaps the mods would like to re-consider, or at the very least explain in more detail why he was banned. Mind you, if I was Lazarus I think I would probaly decide there was little point in staying.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Sept 17, 2010 14:41:56 GMT 1
Lazarus was banned because he simply posted links to green propaganda and wouldn't discuss them in good faith.
|
|
|
Post by oldcofe on Sept 19, 2010 17:06:53 GMT 1
"Lazarus
The function of this board is to provide a forum for entertaining and informative discussion of science-related matter not a grandstand for someone who thinks no discussion is possible unless based on “peer-reviewed” papers. We are not, after all, trying to emulate the behaviour of a court calling expert witnesses, but enabling people to discuss matters that interest them in their own words and within their own understanding.
We have yet to discern that you possess either the ability or intention to debate honestly with other borders and we have given you ample opportunity to demonstrate it . Your ignorance of the debates and controversies which surround the subjects about which you post is making this board a laughing stock. So in the interests of creating conversations that people wish to read and respond to we have decided we must dispense with further input from you.
We have extended the benefit of the doubt for long enough to assess your intentions. Now is the time to call it a day. Thanks for choosing this board.
joanne"
Having only recently joined, I have just seen this. So a poster who posts scientifically accepted (by 95% of climate scientists) ideas politely and without insults is kicked off; others, whose only debating tactic is to slander and defame, are allowed to stay. It's obvious what your agenda is and it has nothing to do with science. I am sorry that I joined. Please delete me from this board.
|
|
|
Post by gizmondo on Sept 19, 2010 18:24:28 GMT 1
I have just joined as well - (I have been looking around for a day or so but it seems pretty dead and this is my first post) and have just noticed this.
I\'m beginning to suspect that the most active members have already left or been banned.
Banning someone for wanting peer review on a science forum is shocking. To do this and then say they are ignorant of the controversies (isn\\\'t being exposed to them a part of this forum?) will make this board a laughing stock.
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on Sept 19, 2010 18:41:28 GMT 1
'Banning someone for wanting peer review on a science forum is shocking' A small overstatement, 'surprising' would have been a better choice. However, to start off 'half-cocked' on a new board is surprising to me. Can I respectfully suggest that all the 'facts' be assembled first, then if Your judgement is still the same, then I'm afraid You will still be incorrect. It is usual to have a mix of 'peer' review papers and more general sites quoted. You will see that I have done both. Your remarks can only be directed at the contentious issue of 'AGW'. Whatever Your feelings on that score, both sides are at least 'pot and kettle'. Do You know why this board is here? Why it is so new? What science are You interested in? Put a question/discussion and see how it is? Remember, if Your judgement of this board is the same as judgement towards science.... Cheers, StuartG [and no I'm only another poster, not a boss-man]
|
|
|
Post by gizmondo on Sept 19, 2010 19:16:16 GMT 1
I don\'t think it is an overstatement, isn\'t science based on research? Of course there is a place for conjecture and hypothesis - that is what drives research but it isn\'t science until then.
Well I don\'t know if I have all the facts, only what I can decent from the posts I have read. It appears that someone called for this person to be banned which they objected to and then they were banned for the reasons stated which seems very flimsy so I suspect there may be more to it. Was he given warnings? It seems that this board is draconian to say the least if they weren\'t, unless whatever they did was gross or totally unacceptable. I\'m assuming it wasn\'t just asking for peer review now.
I joined this message board because it is a bit of an interest but I was mainly pushed with the intention of helping my kids with homework and where I could ask questions. School was quite some time ago and there are some subjects that have changed, like genetics.
But judging on what I have seen so far, this isn\'t the place, nor does my welcome seem very friendly. I may check back in a day or two, or I may not. I feel there must be some sites more suitable to my needs.
|
|
|
Post by Joanne Byers on Sept 19, 2010 20:14:03 GMT 1
I cannot possibly inflict the typo you are affecting on my readers gizmo. We have to maintain standards and they sometimes seem 'draconian' I guess.
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Sept 19, 2010 20:40:22 GMT 1
I'm afraid this board doesn't suit a lot of posters. Free and frank debate scares the hell out of the greenies and lefties. They prefer the old BBC board with un-fettered cat-peeing and biased mods. Take away their ammo and they run for the hills. Now they're trying to devalue this board with sniffy comments from the sidelines. Stand and fight you cowardly twits! Substitute "twits" with what you know I meant.
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on Sept 20, 2010 9:20:07 GMT 1
Just as a matter of interest [and completeness] Lazarus is the 'newest' member of the 'Science File Forums' , I hope He has more luck than our newest. [Newest Member: oldcofe] www.sciencefile.org/SciFile/forum/statsStuartG
|
|
|
Post by abacus9900 on Sept 20, 2010 9:28:29 GMT 1
Just as a matter of interest [and completeness] Lazarus is the 'newest' member of the 'Science File Forums' , I hope He has more luck than our newest. [Newest Member: oldcofe] www.sciencefile.org/SciFile/forum/statsStuartG I'm still not clear about why Lazarus was banned. What, precisely, did he do to upset people?
|
|