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 >  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1478
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 10 2018,06:44   

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 09 2018,12:06)
   
Quote (Alan Fox @ Sep. 09 2018,13:29)
Good. How long need we wait for either support for the allegation that Joshua Swamidass is a liar and a charlatan or an apology in view of the fact such evidence doesn't exist?

That's up to keiths.    He knows he can't trust you, Neil, or DNA_Jock not to modify or remove his comments.  That has a chilling effect on participation.

In the meantime, nothing is stopping you from doing the right thing.  You should apologize for flouting Elizabeth's instructions and abusing your admin privileges in order to take your personal animosity out on keiths.  He wasn't allowed to modify his post, as Elizabeth directed, and you grossly exceeded your authority by banning him for 30 days.  You have behaved badly throughout this situation.  The least you can do at this late date is admit it.

   
Quote
That's up to keiths. My understanding is that he will not be responding on TSZ until Elizabeth returns.
Why can't he do it here? Remember, he published an OP at TSZ that calls Joshua Swamidass a liar and a charlatan and has so far provided no evidence to support those scurrilous allegations.

Why cannot keiths either

1. provide evidence that Joshua Swamidass is a liar and a charlatan. Following the link keiths claims I didn't follow produces no such evidence as Patrick must have confirmed, had he also followed that link.

2. Simply acknowledge he has no supporting evidence fo alleging that Joshua Swamidass is a liar and a charlatan and apologise to Dr Swamidass for making those unfounded allegations.

   
Quote
He knows he can't trust you, Neil, or DNA_Jock not to modify or remove his comments.  That has a chilling effect on participation.
Yes that question mark was a mistake. As I said, with hindsight, I should have simply switched the OP to draft status without bothering to exchange comments with keiths. Fortunately, that issue should not happen again if all TSZ members share the same role as contributor, a change I've suggested. This will mean any new OP will need an admin to publish it. As we now have six admins, that will be a strong safeguard against bias.    
Quote
In the meantime, nothing is stopping you from doing the right thing.  You should apologize for flouting Elizabeth's instructions and abusing your admin privileges in order to take your personal animosity out on keiths.  He wasn't allowed to modify his post, as Elizabeth directed, and you grossly exceeded your authority by banning him for 30 days.  You have behaved badly throughout this situation.  The least you can do at this late date is admit it.
I disagree on the "wasn't allowed to modify his post". He tried to circumvent admins efforts in dealing with the defamatory post by publishing it as a comment. The modification essentially amounted to substituting "falsehood" for "lie".

  
  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]