RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (41) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: The Skeptical Zone, with Lizzie< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Posts: 664
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 09 2018,10:39   

Quote (Alan Fox @ Sep. 09 2018,11:28)
[quote=Patrick,Sep. 09 2018,05:03][/quote]
Discussion sites survive occasional rudeness.

Having recovered a little from the shock. Let me ask in all seriousness if I understand Patrick correctly. It is OK that keiths post the following:    
Swamidass caught lying at

If you need some entertainment, here’s a story that follows a familiar Uncommon Descent plot line:

Charlatan lies; charlatan gets caught; charlatan digs the hole deeper; gets caught some more; and charlatan, in desperation, finally bans the messenger.

In this case the charlatan is Joshua Swamidass, the blog is, and the ban is for a week, not permanent. But it’s basically the same old UD story.

It starts here. I hope the comments don’t get deleted. Given the recent censorship kerfuffle there, Swamidass will be feeling pressure not to delete them. But the evidence is pretty damning, and it will be painful for him to leave them in place. We’ll see what happens.
on Lizzie's personal blog, I remind you, and totally refuse to substantiate his scurrilous allegations? Is that correct, Patrick?

First, keiths hasn't refused to support his claims.  He has provided links to what he says is that support.  Whether or not you agree that his evidence supports his claims, saying that he hasn't tried is not true.

Second, even if his claims are utterly unsupported, you and at least two other admins handled the situation very poorly.  As I noted above, a reasonable steward of TSZ who is aligned with Elizabeth's goals for the site would have behaved something like this:

A member makes a post that doesn't violate any existing rules, but an admin thinks Elizabeth might not want to publish it.  The admin contacts Elizabeth by email with a link to the actual post and asks for her opinion.  If Elizabeth agrees, the admin makes the post unavailable and has a quiet word with the member to explain the situation.  The admin updates the rules page.  The member has the option to rewrite and resubmit the post within the new rules.

Interestingly, while catching up on the Moderation Issues thread, I noticed that there was an issue with a racist comment that was handled similarly to how this should have been.  The difference in response provides yet more support for the idea that you abused your admin privileges primarily because of personal animosity towards keiths.

  1224 replies since Aug. 15 2011,22:52 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (41) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   

Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]