James R's Independent Review Process

Perhaps you don't - but SciForums in general has more than just "tolerance" for such. That kind of thing is openly cultivated here. There's entire fora which contain literally nothing else.

I suppose I admire the conviction there, but when it's combined with the flawed initial premise you get into the sort of trouble that you keep getting into.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

quad
frag says mean spirited insults and baseless accusations are contained in the two posts he banned me for

could you analyze them and perhaps help me see where i erred?
if you have to, break the posts down to its constituent letters for accuracy and rigor

i'll be here for a Q&A session if need be

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Obviously, the issue is that you used "goddamn" an even number of times in the one post. All expletives should come in odd-numbered sets (except on Leap Day or during lunar eclipses, it should go without saying). There's an entire section of the Old Testament that covers this, called the Book of Numbers, but of course the local posting guidelines are absolutely crystal clear and unequivocal (both as written and in practice) on this point. Goddamn goddamn goddamn.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

so ahh
no insults (direct or indirect) or accusations?

is it then, my tone of voice? the evinced lack of respect for his authority and consequential emotional response that resulted in the ban?

 

Surely not. Our betters here are implacable men of principle, caring only for the quality of discourse (maintained through the evidently consistent and clear-cut application of the comprehensible and well-thought-out posting guidelines) and eschewing all subjectivity or egotistical investment. Veritable zen monks of internet chat, all around. Thus, we must conclude that it was the flame war initiated by your post that rankled - I'll have to double-check the archives, but IIRC that flame-war ran for almost 200 pages. Such a massive crime against the community cannot go unanswered, as you well know. Just think of the state the forum would be in if such a precedent had been allowed to stand - we might have endless flame-wars in many fora, and end up sheltering trolls who do nothing but throw bombs! Surely, a short ban for yourself was a worthy price to pay, so that Sci could avoid such a cruel, debased fate.

 

haha
damn, you are an old codger

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

first off, there was a valid and contrasting point to the one you offered despite the flowery language present. that is what you should have focused on.

secondly, the reason i adopted a harsh tone with you is because of your threats to censor and possibly ban me if i post at a rate that exceeds some arbitrary measure of yours in that eclectic thread

you still don't know this?
you initiated this garbage
you are responsible for this entire debacle

i was minding my own goddamn business until you saw fit to troll my fucking thread!!!

tongue in cheek shit. just as the "colonials commenting on british.." was.
how could anyone hold both those ludicrous propositions to be valid?

the thing here frag, is that even tho you have been here close to a decade, you don't get this place. cyberspace and culture remains a mystery to you

i mean, your "notes from a moderator" looks like this....

 

bah
it's a frakking music thread

/dismisses

lets look at this one
i'll give you some keywords and a link then perhaps you can flesh out the analogy if you find it apt and applicable

The Innocence Project

ja
i am saving goddamn lives here!!

/rofl

 

/faceplam

It's news to me that such revelations constitute an irredeemable violation. What qualifies as a "private conversation?" Have people been banned for this before? What exactly is the precedent? Exactly when and where, at SciForums, do I have an expectation of privacy?

I'm - seriously - questioning how it can possibly be deemed less "useful" than the sort of naked pigheadedness that is, apparently, the standard for utility here:

http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=108706

I.e., around the same time that JamesR is here lecturing Gustav on being "useless," he's also spending his time repeatedly baiting and insulting another member over in the Physics forum. That's "useful" or "mature" or what?

I guess what grates me is this insistence on considering Gustav in a vacuum, as if there weren't a positive ocean of much more problematic, disruptive behavior being not only tolerated but actually displayed by the same powers that invoke these putative 'standards' against Gustav.

Well, you'll note that my material that you responded to there was addressed to one JamesR, and not yourself.

But if you come in for more criticism of this sort, I'd suggest that it's because people sense that you're actually reasonable and your positions about standards and expectations are serious enough to merit some respect. So there's some real point in addressing such criticisms to you. Many of your colleagues have long-since been written off as beneath such efforts. I'd take it as a form of compliment.

 

Nice. I'm trying to figure out if there's some analog of DNA evidence that would be apropos here... and realizing that the analogy is even more damning than that. I.e., look at the list of problems that the Innocence Project tries to address:

Eyewitness misidentification
Improper forensic science
False confessions
Government misconduct
Informants
Bad lawyering

... and observe that only one of those is even relevant to SciForums' punitive system (government misconduct). The others don't even come up, because there is no trial system - no juries, no defense attornies, no impartial judges, no evidentiary procedures. Just mods who get to indict, convict and sentence at their discretion.

So, I'd suggest this this is a better analogy. You're a political prisoner of a fundamentally illiberal system, not just some prosecutorial-misconduct statistic.

 

let me roll out ....toot toot.......the string incidents!

here is one that got me banned for a 1 month
here is another that got me banned for 2 weeks

you can sate your curiosity there
review and give me your verdict on both

feel free to ask for clarifications if required

 

quad
lemme offer up an analogy

the players,willnever and gustav

points can add up to a permaban which is equivalent to the death penalty
lets say four points earns you the death penalty
the players both have accumulated 3 points

any additional points means death
what transpired here?

a retraction of 1 point per player
thus the achievement here has been to stave off death to a moment further off into the future

most importantly any permaban would have been wrongfully implemented due to the presence of these bogus points in our records

do you see?

it must be noted that these points were removed on technical grounds an not on actual misconduct on part of the moderators

still tho, i commend james for his integrity and fairness and look forward to more of the same

 

i suppose i better bring this shit to the table as well

The Supreme Court, by a 5-4 vote, upheld the indeterminate life sentence with no possibility of parole for 50 years that Leandro Andrade received for stealing $153 worth of children's videotapes from Kmart.

An Army veteran and a father of three, Andrade never had committed a violent offense. He was 37 years old in 1996 when he was sentenced; his earliest possible parole date is 2046, when he will be 87 years old.

The other case the U.S. Supreme Court heard involved Gary Ewing, who received an indeterminate life sentence with no possibility of parole for 25 years for stealing three golf clubs.

For at least a century, the high court has held that grossly disproportionate sentences constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the 8th Amendment. If any sentence is grossly disproportionate, surely it is life imprisonment for shoplifting.

As Justice David Souter observed in his dissenting opinion, "If Andrade's sentence is not grossly disproportionate, the principle has no meaning." In no other state could Andrade and Ewing have received these sentences. Every other state with a three-strikes law requires that the third strike be a serious or violent offense.

At the time Andrade and Ewing were convicted, the maximum penalty for rape was eight years in prison, for manslaughter, 11 years, and for second-degree murder, 15 years. Yet the U.S. Supreme Court says it is permissible to put shoplifters in prison for life.​

ja
all it takes is a simple "fuck" on my part, sentiments such as these ....

...on part of the mods and..................

fucking sci
how the fuck did i get to be public enemy #1?
i mean. ain't i the nicest guy in the whole wide world?

/cackle

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

hehe
that was probably used as asswipe

 

Sure I did.

Not that it matters. Your treatment of Tach is a naked violation of posting guidelines regardless of anything anyone else wrote in that thread. That you are a moderator makes that doubly offensive - a crime against those very guidelines, and now, apparently, an endorsement of some kind of "two wrongs make a right" inanity.

And there you are again: more interested in baiting and dick-waving than exhibiting the maturity and responsibility befitting your station.

 

i laughed so hard, tears..........

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Obviously, you didn't read that entire thread. There are links to music files associated with said images, including some original material produced by collaborations of Sci posters. Lots of creativity, good humor, and fun on offer - what's not to like?

Why on Earth would you suggest that said images are "random," by the way?

Oh, I guess there was supposed to be some hook about "science" to make that stick. To which: who do you think you're fooling, at this late juncture? This isn't a "science site." Why would you even have an "arts & culture" subforum, if there was some expectation of "scientific usefulness" in force? Even in the subfora that nominally should be about science, you exhibit way more interest in bullying Tach than discussing science.

So, can the lectures about "usefulness" and "science" until such a time as you develop some credibility on such matters.

Only some of them.

 

what
some and not most?
no madonna?

/snicker

 

poor james
such a bitter little man

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

/sneer

edit:

hmm
james
i wrote and performed a song especially for you, frag and string
you did not see the post? click the image?

if so
here

amateurish shit but funny, ja?

james r
my muse