Re: Treatment of some posters

From: Bill Hobba (bhobba_at_rubbish.net.au)
Date: 02/12/05 

Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 02:55:58 GMT

"AllYou!" <idaman@conversent.net> wrote in message
news:gLadnUEUL9wKppffRVn-rw@conversent.net...
>
> "N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)" <N: dlzc1 D:cox T:net@nospam.com> wrote in
message
> news:bnqOd.32941$Yu.14218@fed1read01...
> > Dear AllYou:
> >
> > > AllYou! wrote:
> > >> There is no justification for vilifying posters simply because
> > >> they have different ideas, not matter how ignorant or
> > >> misguided they might be. Dressing it up with self-serving
> > >> rationalizations doesn't change that.
> > >>
> > >> Personal attacks even if it's for simply holding onto ignorant
> > >> views, no matter how terribly mi-guided they might be, is a
> > >> form of McCarthyism, pure and simple.
> >
> > I'm reaching over "PD" 's shoulder to see your response...
> >
> > I agree with you. However, "vilification" is not occurring, in my
opinion.
>
> It may not be happening in a particular situation, but I can tell you that
it happemd to
> me and it's ongoing.
>
> > Ilja is pushing aether, and is encouraged in that work. Here, on
> > sci.physics.relativity. The home of "aether isn't necessary, so it
doesn't
> > exist".
> >
> > "Dressing up with self-serving rationalizations" is not what was
offered.
> > There is no rationalizing life, or the consequent pain and death that
this
> > brings. What was offered was a possible insight into why the same
person
> > keeps coming back with the same problem (even if dressed in different
> > clothes). They like the flavor of pain they get here. Because they are
> > not using the pain to fix the root problem. Nature does this "fixing"
by
> > killing the organism, and hoping offspring (or competitors) can "get
it".
>
> I'll not deny that there are those who come back with the same problem, or
even others,
> for no reason but to rankle the regulars. But the problem is the danger
associated with
> knowing for sure who is who. It's pretty ironic that the same scientist
who claim that a
> theory can never be proven because no matter how many times it's tested,
there's no
> certainty that the test will not fail at some point, can also believe that
they can
> predict exactly who the trolls are.

It is the same reasoning you use to predict those that play on freeways will
have a short life expectancy.

>
> I say it's a danger because science should not be dominated by those who
have the
> mentality that it's acceptable, and even laudatory, to personally attack
and attempt to
> publicly discredit those with whom they disagree, no matter how radical
their views or how
> steadfastly they adhere to them.

People who post that they have seen all these problems supposedly smart
physicts have not then post rubbish such as 'When will it not occur to you
that time is nothing more than a concept. It's simply the derivative of
velocity and distance and that's all.' get what they deserve.

> Ignore, sure. Challenge, certainly. Illustrate
> apparent flaws and inconsistancies, no question. But attempt to
personally villify and
> humiliate? That's simply not a justifiable reason, and the danger of
painting sincere
> participants is simply not worth it.

Those that insist on making ridiculous statements that indicate they nothing
in a tone of I am correct and make no mistake about it get exactly what
he/she deserves. Those interested in reasoned debate do not adopt such
tactics.

>
> > I couldn't stop arguing with you, for example. You could not hear what
I
> > had to say, and I would not resort to the standard toolkit of "peer
> > pressure", including humiliation, to get you to look at your premises.
So
> > I have blocked your posts (and others, some of whom I miss), so that I
do
> > not have the urge to do this. I don't villify you. I simply don't
provide
> > the strokes you appear to want from this place. It does not serve you,
or
> > me, to grow.
>
> All of that is acceptable except attempts at *including humiliation*.
That's simply not
> acceptable, and bespeaks your arrogance and character flaw.

And the humiliation you inflict on others by your constant use of foul
language does not count? A goolge search on Allyou! and *** retrieved the
following
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/search?group=sci.physics.relativity&q=AllYou%21+***&qt_g=1.

>
> > And McCarthyism had people killed, put in jail, or with ruined careers.
> > This here is *nothing* like McCarthyism.
>
> It is like McCarthyism in the sense that it attempts to silence the
dissenters. In an
> open and free society, this is objectionable, and in the forum of ideas,
it's highly
> dangerous. BTW, McCarthy thought just as surely that he knew the truth
too, and he
> started out very innocently as well.

Unlike you - right from my first encounter it was obvious you did not want
to discuss physics - simply engage in senseless semantic battering and to
provide an outlet for your foul rhetoric.

>
> > In science, you are measured by
> > results.
>
> By science is conducted with ideas, and moved forward with dissent.

Dissent involves reasoned debate - not your senseless semantic ****ing and
easy resort to foul language.

>
> > In usenet, you are judged only by your words. But words are kept
> > for a very long time. You know this ahead of time. You make your own
> > "face". And the rules aren't changing. If you are in pain because you
> > knowingly threw yourself in front of a steam roller, this isn't
> > McCarthyism... it is self-flagellation. Some religious orders still
> > practice it.
>
> Your apparent belief that you *know* who should be in such pain betrays
your arrogance.

The ease with which you make ridicules statements and claim some kind of
intellectual superiority is sickening.

Bill

>
> > So "Goodbye" again.
>
> To hit and run betrays your cowardice.
>

Quantcast