The Threads:

Bush & Blair: Walking barefooted on the hot Iraqi coals - ouch! (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=34725) -- The thread was created just to get my attention. Goading, baiting; call it what you want. Also, when posting a thread, you have to offer some type of commentary.

American Empire, This too will pass...... (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=34527) -- Whirlwind, this time, does credit the aurthor; but he posts the entire text of the article without a link, and with no commentary.

Back to basics: Bush -vs- Hitler's "War on Terrorism." (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=34687) -- Whirlwind "forgets" to post a link, again, and attempts to pass it as his own work, again. In the real world this is known as plagiarism. Plagiarism is also a violation of the site rules.

Geore W. Bush's resume. (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=34516) -- Plagiarism again, and the full text, again. Not only that, but he posted this thread twice (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=34290). This is also a violation of the site rules. Plagiarism, full text, no link, and cross-posting.

Bush/Cheney siamese twins confess: Rice did it! (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=34515) -- Full text, again. No link, again. Plagiarism, again.

Bush: How Chicken Little became Chicken Hawk. (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=34350) -- Full text, again. No link, again. Plagiarism, again.

George W. Bush's Resume (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=34290) -- This is the same thread that I had closed before. Once again: Cross posting, plagiarism, full text, no link, etc.

The last two threads, titled Whirlwind (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=34235) and They kill men in wheel chairs, huh? (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=34236), are the same thread. That's cross posting, again.

By my count the following violations have occurred:
Five counts of plagiarism.
Five counts of posting the full text of an article.
Two counts of cross posting (Four threads).
Four counts of posting a thread with no commentary (I'm not counting the articles that he tried to pass as his own).
One count of goading/baiting.
One count of off-topic posting (This thread was originally started in Politics).
That's 18 violations of the New Forum Rules (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=34522).

The real question that everyone should be asking is why I haven't requested his banning yet.

This Thread (http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=34743&page=1&pp=20)

Are all these charges valid?

What is goading/baiting, exactly?

Should he be banned, or not?

Note:

This is the original Nazis Vs. Bush, that Whirlwind plagiarized. (http://c0balt.com/resources/terror/terror.shtml)

The "Resume" bit is common, but I believe this is the original. (http://mindprod.com/bushresume.html)

The old switcheroo, an aritcle written by Tom Engelhardt and plagiarized by Whirlwind. (http://progressivetrail.org/articles/040402Engelhardt.shtml)

I can't be certain that I have the original, but coincidentally enough, someone wrote the exact same thing as Whirlwind's "Chicken Little" spiel, over at Mideast Realities. (http://www.middleeast.org/forum/fb-public/1/2671.shtml)

He is a troll (goading/baiting), he comes here only to bitch about the bush administration... though that is a good thing he does it so badly as to piss us off. He also has a thing for CounselorCoffee, fucking with a moderator is a BIG NO NO!!! let kick him out the door!

Refrance: http://www.sciforums.com/search.php?searchid=58351

Let us dismiss the fact that he never posts but on one topic, Fetus.

A precedent was set in the PM Poll, that one cannot be banned simply on the basis of one's single-mindedness.



Let us focus on Whirlwind's more blatant violations.

There are the multiple counts of plagiarism and of full-text-posting (without commentary). There are also the charges of cross posting and of goading/baiting, or trolling.

Furthermore, should his pointlessly slanderous and persistent treatment of CounslerCoffee be taken as harassment?

How do these offenses relate to the posting time of new rules in relation to the topics in the given fora? (Actually, I'll take a closer look when I'm home and have time, and can answer it for myself.)

But the first question that comes to mind is how to treat ex post facto. As an American, I'm accustomed against it, but it might not be an issue. (Again, I'll take a look for myself later.)

Constantly posting on one topic and attacking, insulting and abusing any one that disagrees with you is trolling. You hook an issue, try to get people to bit then reel them up and eat them: hence the controversial definition of a troll and trolling.

Constantly posting on one subject is not a crime we have many people like that, some of them we call Kooks. Its when you get rude and mean about it that it becomes a problem.

It strikes me that my issue is moot. Even those offenses that come before the new rules were posted in the forum are generally offensive according to the old rules, which can still be found here (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=20363) (though not for much longer; I have no excuse for not updating EM&J ....)

However ... I await Whirlwind's choice to respond to this topic or not.

Everybody that posts frequently in the politics subforum should be banned.

I think we have a lot of people voting no just because they hate banning polls, Hey I do to but that does not mean I’m going to just let these people stay.

Hello everyone! I bet you were all wondering when I would pop in and say "Hello everyone! I bet you were all wondering when I," forget it.

Personally, and this is just me, I hold plagiarism to be the highest offense that can committed on sciforums. Something that can bring legal action against this website should be the highest offense. And five counts of it? Well, that's just unacceptable.

-- The Grand Dragon Gizzard

Hmmm......
Guess I get to defend him. :(

Look he's new here and just hasn't figured us all out yet.
And just consider how his old mum would feel if her son got banned in his first term.

Give the kid a second chance.

Thats the best I can do whirlwind.
Don't worry, that bit about your mum should swing em over.
Dee Cee

Ignore him; he'll go away. Maybe somebody should PM him, explaining how to post a link. He's obviously not intelligent enough to construct his own thesis on the stuff that's bugging him, so he probably doesn't know how to link either. Nevertheless, he has a desire to express information that some may not have access to, which is not a bad thing, but he needs to learn how to put it in his own words so that it becomes a basis for discussion, otherwise it seems like baseless propaganda, even if it is true.

Isn't there such a thing as "IGNORE" if you have an issue with someone?

He's inconveniencing everyone, moderators included... not just me.

I notice a trend here, any one who is anti Bush, Anti Israeli and Muslim or pro Muslim is under attack. calls for his ban are coming from certain neo cons or their supporters in this forum, Those Zionist neo cons are trying to hijack the forum and clear it from all voices that expose them.

I hope the owner of this forum will realize that.

PM this is a slightly different set of circumstances we're considering. Apparently Whirlwind stands accused of a number of technical violations that have nothing to do with content.

And yes, Porfiry is well aware of affiliations and alignments within this microdrama. It's one of the chief reasons, on the one hand, there's so few bans, and also one of the chief reasons he puts up with the lot of us in the first place.

Quite obviously, he hasn't gone hacksaw-happy since the advent of SFOG.

As to the trend ... it's part of liberalism, enlightenment, liberation, &c. And it's just the way the chips fall. One of the things Westerners have never accustomed themselves to is the idea of what to do about what you don't like when you're supposed to be enlightened. (Al Franken's book deals with that idea somewhat; it's curious watching him wrestle with it.) It's why some ban requests disappoint me inwardly more than others, while those others just piss me off.

But this ... this is technical grounds. Repeated plagiarism, cross-posting at the least as accusations. I keep waiting for a plagiarism accusation to be answered with, "Hey, I wrote the blog!" Little things like that can make all the difference in the world at these times.

I notice a trend here, any one who is anti Bush, Anti Israeli and Muslim or pro Muslim is under attack.

I'm anti-Bush, and nobody has attacked me yet. I feel like I'm missing out. :(

James is an evil little rat bastard who suffers from chronic masturbation.
You left-wingers are child-molesting drug-addicted clod-hoppers.
You are a thick-headed menace to all that we real Americans stand for!

And don't throw out that lame. "I'm from Australia" excuse!

;) Feel better?

I'm anti-Bush, and nobody has attacked me yet. I feel like I'm missing out. :(
Well maybe beacuse everybody is entitled to their own opinion. Unless it is something very negitive or really really bad.

PM:
I notice a trend here, any one who is anti Bush, Anti Israeli and Muslim or pro Muslim is under attack.

In your case, I don't think it has anything to do with any of that, although FTR, I voted against banning you in the other thread, but only because I disagree with banning, it's too much like a social club tactic.

Look he's new here and just hasn't figured us all out yet.

I still think he's the reincarnate of a former poster, who's name I won't mention again to save Rick the trouble of deleting it. ;)

... calls for his ban are coming from certain neo cons or their supporters in this forum, Those Zionist neo cons are trying to hijack the forum and clear it from all voices that expose them.

You're calling me a neo-con?

Proud_Muslim,

Its ad hominem generalizations like that, that has you with a ban thread.

"You're calling me a neo-con?"
I wouldn't, because you're a neo-anal-con.

I notice a trend here, any one who is anti Bush, Anti Israeli and Muslim or pro Muslim is under attack. calls for his ban are coming from certain neo cons or their supporters in this forum, Those Zionist neo cons are trying to hijack the forum and clear it from all voices that expose them.

I hope the owner of this forum will realize that.What? heck, I may be the only one calling him "Baby Bush", I think that Israel is an occupier nation, oh, but I'm not muslim, do you think that's it? are you saying this is all an anti-muslim thing? Come on, speak up! Is it?

Listen man, I don't believe anyone should be banned, unless they stalk, troll or endanger other people. Plagiarizing is bad, but I don't think this is a scientific or academic journal, most people would like, I think, their ideas put out into the net, hopefully with attributes, but if you copy from like minded folks, what’s the prob? even if you do it bud. I don’t think they’ll sue you

oh & don't thank me, I’m not supporting you, just the idea of freedom of speech

:p :p :D

Maybe we should invade Syria, and occupy it until he and all his shabab learn some freaking respect for their goddam freedom.

Raise the count of plagiarism to six charges.

US Media: "In bed" or "embedded" with political corruption in Iraq. (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=556652#post556652) -- Watch as his writing style magically changes from someone else’s, to his.

Appears to me that Whirlwind is taking the suggestions of moderators, even though these have been leveled with a certain measure of both disdain and rudeness, to heart. I say, give him substantial room to clean up his act. Some of his subjects have opened up popular threads. Don't ban him on the basis of his prolificness. Help him to handle more information in courteous fashion and this forum will benefit.

Maybe we should invade Syria, and occupy it until he and all his shabab learn some freaking respect for their goddam freedom.
I think this is the best thing I've read all week!

Thanks, goofyfish. I almost feel a kinship with Proud_Muslim now. Almost. ;)

Mr. Chips,
Appears to me that Whirlwind is taking the suggestions of moderators

No. After his first thread I warned him. He did not listen. Then the second, third, and fourth, were all warnings to. His fifth thread was his last shot. And now his sixth thread? No, I don't give fifth, sixth, or God willing: seventh chances. I also don't like cross-posting. How many warnings should I allow? 15? 16? How about 30? I'll sit here and wait until he starts postings 1984 as his own work.

Raise the count of plagiarism to six charges.

US Media: "In bed" or "embedded" with political corruption in Iraq. (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=556652#post556652) -- Watch as his writing style magically changes from someone else’s, to his.

did you figure out this particular source of alleged plaigerism? if not, i hope you are aware that you are making unsubstantiated accusations of a rather serious nature.

did you figure out this particular source of alleged plaigerism? if not, i hope you are aware that you are making unsubstantiated accusations of a rather serious nature.

Nope, I'm not. The last few plaigerized articles were hard to find (I had to have other users find them). But you can obviously tell that Whirlwind did not write that piece. If you read the post, you'll notice a huge change in writing style by the end of it.

From The Thread In Question:
I gave a talk to a group of Journalism majors at the UofA last week regarding "Honesty in reporting" in the US media.

Tell me, and I asked Whirlwind in a PM, what the heck he does? If he has a blog, or some website where he writes, then why not post it as the source? Wouldn't you want people to view it? Wouldn't you want to draw attention to it? He didn't answer that question, but went on a rant about how wrong I am. I know I'm right in this instance, as I was with the past few threads (You'll notice that he has a few threads that are open; because they follow the site rules).

When people view that thread, they'll send me the original article source. Until then it's a closed thread. If, and this is very unlikely, it turns out that I'm wrong; I'll re-open the thread.

-- The Grand Dragon Gizzard

If you read the post, you'll notice a huge change in writing style by the end of it.

i take it you are in the forensic sciences? the paragraph you refer to, sounds like a rant where the gentleman in question appears to be blowing off some steam. perhaps speaking "off the record"

Tell me, and I asked Whirlwind in a PM, what the heck he does?

do you intend to inquire into my personal affairs too?

If he has a blog, or some website where he writes, then why not post it as the source?

is this a requirement? what if the original is on paper? do you guys provide a land address

Wouldn't you want people to view it? Wouldn't you want to draw attention to it?

sorry but you appear to be getting very intrusive

I know I'm right in this instance, as I was with the past few threads

i am not familiar with the others but you have the benefit of the doubt

When people view that thread, they'll send me the original article source.

should i enlist?

Until then it's a closed thread. If, and this is very unlikely, it turns out that I'm wrong; I'll re-open the thread.

guilty until proven innocent? i must admit it is an easy way out

what is a grand dragon gizzard anyway?

I wouldn't, because you're a neo-anal-con.

Oh shut up...

Well, I for one would like to book Whirlwind for one of his public speeches. Only I don't have a corporation or class of journalism students to host him.

Nonetheless, if he's this incoherent and hyperactive here, those speeches must be insane!

Tiassa,
He's on the same level as Howard Dean.

-- The Grand Dragon Gizzard

Here is more proof that he must go:
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=35030
I don't care what this poll comes to, he will be banished with in a month tops!

Tiassa,
He's on the same level as Howard Dean.

-- The Grand Dragon Gizzard
Hey! I resent that, I voted for him, even if he couldn't win, He still represended my views on the war, Baby Bush & the economy,
& yes, I could scream, but ol' Dean did it for me!

:D

Really? On par with Dean? Hey, Dean can be a dynamic and convincing speaker.

Whirlwind - how do we go about booking you for a speaking appearance?

I hear his class has show and tell on Mondays. Maybe the teacher will let you visit.

I don't see how anyone could or would contest it at this point.

Whirlwind is a troll (http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=35030) and spammer (http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=35030&page=2).

He is a particularly nauseating example of the need for more rigorous supervision and administration, as per more moderators.

fighting with the moderators on the issue of what they said to him makes him a flammer too.

CC, you are showing your colors. Dean is too genuine to make it as a serious contender for president. Only the most adept phonies have a chance at the white house. Politics is the art of misleading. Oh well.

Rappaccini, I fail to see how the examples you have posted prove your claims. I don't see Whirlwind as trying to take over anything or anybody nor fill threads with repeated inconsequentials. Maybe you consider that if you make a link to something, that makes it real?

Trolls do not "take over". They goad/bait. The thread I cited is a perfect example.

Spam is useless posting. We all do it occasionally, but Whirlwind is excessive. The posts he made on page 2 of that thread are blatant spam, vapid and silly.

I guess if he is continually plagiarizing then he has to be banned although I think that there should be temporary banns as a warning if that is not too much trouble. I dislike whirlwind intensely but he represents an entirely different viewpoint which is what the forums are all about.

about temporary banning as a sign of warning: if you're banned temporarily, you can just go find another forum. Is it that big a deal if you're banned? I mean, it's not nice... but if you have a life then I'm sure you can get over it.

Bob might be annoying, but I don't know about banning him at this point. It seems so pointless. He'll figure out a way to come back. They always do.

He's amusing in that he's not that smart so he's an easy target. Sometimes after a long day of going after Wahoo, Yellowfin and Mahi Mahi, it can be very relaxing to just put on a bobber and let the bluegills come to the worm. It's a guaranteed bite, and they fight pretty hard relative to their diminutive nature.

Is that wrong of me to toy with the little ones? The little people need attention too, right? To ignore them all of the time would be misanthropic, right?

Bob's like Truthseeker in that you don't feel bad in kicking his ass because he begs you so hard to kick it you'd be a jerk not to oblige him. I've never been a masochist so I don't really understand them, but meh... :rolleyes: I guess they feel that they fulfill some role in society.

I think Whirlwind contributes a lot to this forum as a comic relief. I voted no so that he can continue giving us laugh breaks.

By the way, I know that he is a "he" because he claimed to be a jet fighter pilot. Oops, is it not true that women have been allowed to fly jets? If it is true then forgive me for being a sexist (or should I say humbly "sexiest"?).

I just checked the voting results for this poll. It is 25 yes and 26 no (it would have been 25/25 if I did not already voted). This is so close! As a Florida Flashback, I demand a recount and a full investigation of voting fraud!

But seriously, this is an interesting poll. I do not recall if there ever was an instant that I agree with Whirlwind about anything but he should have the right to speak.

guess what. 26/26

guess what. 26/26
happy to break the tie

I do not recall if there ever was an instant that I agree with Whirlwind about anything but he should have the right to speak.

This isn't about a right to speak.

It's about repeatedly breaking the rules and mocking the administration when it warns against it.

Rappa, you forget that certain people aren't going to read this thread. The ones voting yes have probably read the thread, and know the situation. The ones voting no, like paulsamuel, come out of no where and assume that they know the situation.

paulsamuel,

You voted no? why??? Did you not read the evidence presented???

paulsamuel,

You voted no? why??? Did you not read the evidence presented???
he's no worse than others here, and he's entitled to his freedom of speech. even Xev, who's supposed to be a moderator, is as bad as him. at least with whirlwind, you can ignore him. Xev is imposed on us.

Xev does not break any of the explicit rules concerning plagiarism and full-document posting without commentary.
Xev does not disregard the warnings of moderators or describe those moderators derisively and mendaciously.

I'd have to say that the situation is quite different here, paulsamuel.


"Freedom of speech" is totally irrelevant here.
"Freedom of speech" does not allow for crimes like plagiarim or other misdeeds like cut'n paste posting and harassment of the administration.


You didn't even read the thread before you voted and posted, huh?

Again it not a matter of what he said but what he did: he broke the forums rules, at least 18 times!

Also no, on the internet there is no law saying everyone is entitled to free speech, especially on a forum. A lot of our members got to stop confusing this forum for a free country!

Lets review this again because you obviously did not read it:
Originally Posted by CounslerCoffee

The Threads:

Bush & Blair: Walking barefooted on the hot Iraqi coals - ouch! -- The thread was created just to get my attention. Goading, baiting; call it what you want. Also, when posting a thread, you have to offer some type of commentary.

American Empire, This too will pass...... -- Whirlwind, this time, does credit the aurthor; but he posts the entire text of the article without a link, and with no commentary.

Back to basics: Bush -vs- Hitler's "War on Terrorism." -- Whirlwind "forgets" to post a link, again, and attempts to pass it as his own work, again. In the real world this is known as plagiarism. Plagiarism is also a violation of the site rules.

Geore W. Bush's resume. -- Plagiarism again, and the full text, again. Not only that, but he posted this thread twice. This is also a violation of the site rules. Plagiarism, full text, no link, and cross-posting.

Bush/Cheney siamese twins confess: Rice did it! -- Full text, again. No link, again. Plagiarism, again.

Bush: How Chicken Little became Chicken Hawk. -- Full text, again. No link, again. Plagiarism, again.

George W. Bush's Resume -- This is the same thread that I had closed before. Once again: Cross posting, plagiarism, full text, no link, etc.

The last two threads, titled Whirlwind and They kill men in wheel chairs, huh?, are the same thread. That's cross posting, again.

By my count the following violations have occurred:
Five counts of plagiarism.
Five counts of posting the full text of an article.
Two counts of cross posting (Four threads).
Four counts of posting a thread with no commentary (I'm not counting the articles that he tried to pass as his own).
One count of goading/baiting.
One count of off-topic posting (This thread was originally started in Politics).
That's 18 violations of the New Forum Rules.

The real question that everyone should be asking is why I haven't requested his banning yet.

I say make Whirlwind a moderator .

You lack sanity, Brian.

I hate, hate, hate bannings. Plus I am relatively new here and don't really feel I have the right to impose such decisions. However, since only Porf can actually ban, I see this as an opinion poll only.

Plagiarism is illegal and endangers the very existance of Sciforums. If a violator does not stop after being warned, out they should go, for the safety of all others, Porf, and the board itself. If the person is left, right, middle, gay, Moslem, Jew, Xian, athiest... does not matter.

Violations? Warned? Continued? Banned.

*ching ching* (my two cents)

Motion passed. Whirlwind is banned.