Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by Mr. Chips, Jul 14, 2004.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Paulsamuel, don´t you think you are taking this a bit too far? I do think that SkinWalker has valid arguments. Whereas your response not really supports your credibility.
Furthermore, I do think that your behaviour is somewhat strange for a scientist with muliple degrees, someone who is in his late forties (as I assume from the online phone book of Hawaii) should be able to talk about this matter in a civil and objective way.
If that were the extent of it I doubt I'd have complained. The problem is that you have repeatedly demonstrated a lack of comprehension of the concepts involved. You are thereby simply unfit.
WellCookedFetus called me at work!!!!!!
From the first, it's the victim who's been attacked and castigated.
If one took the time to look at my posts, I attack only in response to attacks, in other words, defending myself.
WellCookedFetus called me at work!!!!!!
SkinWalker has no valid arguments. Please name the arguments that appear valid to you.
I am objective and civil until attacked, then I defend myself.
police to skin...so, is this a case of doctor assisted suicide?
skin to police...no, he hoped the guy would commit suicide
police to skin...we are gonna bill you for our time. have a nice day
i wanna make fetus.. the moderator of the year. he hit the ground running and never looked back!
Yes, thank you, I actually figured out that WCF supposedly called you at
work. And as I have said in the "harassment" thread, I do not think that something like that is acceptable. Nonetheless, you do seem to attack nearly everybody that does not agree with you.
Furthermore, your statements are overly agressive in my eyes. Edging a mental unstable person towards suicide (if WCF´s psyche is really damaged that far) just because you are displeased with his behaviour and opinions is unjust and outrageous.
Also, your behaviour is a bit childish. Granted, someone obviously called you at work (assuming that you speak the truth in this...) and it likely was a member of this board. This of course is not tolerable, but there are other ways of settling this. Alas, I do not see a definite proof that WCF made those calls. And don´t go on and drag that stupid statement made by WCF up again. You know, the one about him giving away your name and phone number to some dude who, as a result, called you. From the way it was phrased, it was obviously a joke, and not a confession.
But you do not appear to talk in a civil manner about this, all I see is your anger to some members. Up to some degree, I can relate to it, but in my eyes, you make more of this incident than there is.
As you may well have noticed, I am focusing on your remark concerning suicide. I cannot really relate to all the things Skinwalker referred to, I am yet reading up on those other threads he mentioned. But you have to admit that in many posts you show an amount of "hatred" towards WCF, and from the things I gather, not everything is justified.
As to Skinwalkers validity, I do think he has a point. Your ego seems to get into the way of your objectivity, you accuse people that they are attacking you, while you try to shift all attention to the things accredited to WCF. This is not an objective view, it is extremely biased. And yet you call Skinwalker a liar, for what if I may ask? Your statements are just as objectionable as those of the moderator in question.
In my opinion, you have lost a great deal of credibility due to your egoistical, unfriendly and prejudiced posts.
Of course, you will accuse me of multiple things due to this post. Perhaps you will also call me a liar, or you may call my statements unfounded and without a solid base, but I have to admit that I do not konw you, I only have read what you posted in the few threads about this harassment issue and the modship of WCF. This of course gives me a very narrow view of your personality, but then again, these are the only threads that are really directed at the issue. And from the things I have read here, I have to say that you appear to be quite a sorry ass with some deficits concerning his manners, tolerance and ego.
Since you have no proof whatsoever, why don´t you let it go? Are you really that outraged about two phone calls? Or is it a personal issue with WCF, someone you only know online, someone who has own problems that might make him act the way he does? I cannot understand you.
If he was who called and he was such a threat, don't you think instead of saying "He called me at work" you'd be saying "He keeps calling me at work", however it seems what ever was done has been done and hasn't been done anymore, so in certain respects I wouldn't concern yourself to such depths, otherwise your announcing how concerned you are which to some is perhaps the rise they are looking for.
I would also suggest being a bit more professional with how you present yourself to others for your own sake, as otherwise it undermines you as a professional.
Heck I've had my fair share of crankcalls, people ringing up and just being a deadline, however I didn't freakout, heck I usually just don't hang up and leave the phone open a while till they hang up. It's their bill at the end of the day.
As for this thread, I personally think it's run it's course as all it's now is a momument to what was and will continue to be a thorn in your side Paul not just WCF.
I only attack in defense, when I'm attacked. Go and look!
It was obviously a confession and not a joke. He was extremely distraught that I exposed his misbehaviour to the rest of the forum. He said (I'm paraphrasing), "wouldn't it be funny to find out exactly who you are" that's when i get the call.
nah, he did it, and every one knows it, just not every one is able to admit they know it.
well, i'm sorry you feel that way. obviously i don't agree. i have merely responded in kind, in fact, i never gave to xev what she handed out to me.
try take a look at the argument between wesmorris and fetus right now.
you think maybe fetus brings this on himself?
fetus is a kid who needs help. blaming me or any of the multitudinous others who've had problems with him here, is mis-targeting the issue.
you don't understand me? go back and read the threads i've been involved in.
Calling you at work isn't illegal, but it IS creepy. especially if he did it TWICE. Ack. Certainly childish behavior, indicative of the immaturity in question.
He should NOT be banned from sciforums, not even temporarily. However, IMO he is demonstrably unfit to be a mod.
On a side note; otheadp's comments that he can't tell which side he's on may have some merit... but deriliction doesn't necessarily take sides.
wracked by emotion and guilt, tormented by his inner demons, skinwalker launches a crazed and contradictory analysis of the good professor
the walker diatribe
*But one has to consider that what is most important to paulsamuel isn't necessarily whether justice is served.
*Personally, I think it's likely that the calls never occurred and that Armstrong/paulsamuel is responding to bruised ego.
*He's demonstrated that ego is important to him, after all
* And he didn't miss an opportunity to announce his qualifications:
*Indeed, paulsamuel crossposted his rant to Xev on several occasions in a most annoying manner
*What drives a person with a Ph.D., "a geneticist, a Dr., a scientist, a university level teacher" to continue to participate in forum and interact with those that cause him such grief? Could it be the same motivation that such an alleged intellectual would hope death upon a student? His ego?
*It's no wonder that when WCF attained the status of Moderator that it would have an affect on paulsamuel.
*One must wonder about a professor that allows two internet strangers to bother him so. One must wonder about a professor that wishes death upon a student.
*And paulsamuel has history of badgering members, particularly moderators
the meaningless distinctions
*WCF wasn't exactly nice to paulsamuel, but the level of ad hominem attack was certainly more severe from the "esteemed professor."
the direct attacks
*One must wonder if the telephone calls to this alleged professor's alleged place of business actually occurred.
*Shame on you paulsamuel/Paul Armstrong. What a blight you are upon the academic community and the university you work for (if, indeed, you do).
this one i particularly liked....
One must wonder if the telephone calls to this alleged professor's alleged place of business actually occurred.
paul is no longer a professor. nor is he at a university. the phone calls are fictitious.
can anybody get this fucking evil? i mean, even i would never stoop this low!
The false claim:
"can anybody get this fucking evil? i mean, even i would never stoop this low!"
hehehe Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
hey it was worth a try
good one wessie
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Paulsamuel: the only thing you appear to be right about is my misunderstanding the context of the "Jeff Conner" post. Regardless of the context, the general implication is the same.
I believe that's what I had already pointed out about your posting history. True, my ego influences my internet activity. But I don't hope anyone dies. You said I should *do* something. Perhaps I have.
By the way, your use of the "F"-word is impressive. Goes with the Ph.D.?
(it would have been much funnier if you left out "b/w these", not that I necessarily agree. i think EVERYONE is an asshole some of the time.)
perhaps your misunderstanding extends to my responses to fetus' attacks on me.
but you didn't use my posting history, you cherry-picked some responses when i was defending myself.
this is misleading
this has little to do with anything, but for reasons of not dealing with stupid shit - I've stopped caring about the subject of this thread.
clean slate with fetus, only request, try to understand and be cool to people, like not erasing thoughts they value unless you absolutely have to. you can be a good mod if you kick back a bit maybe, so give it a shot. you seriously need to work on understanding the dynamic of a thread and understanding what comprises an insult.
i am extremely confident I'm correct in my analysis of what comprises an insult. try to consider expanding your comprehension about it if you can please. if you disagree, I'll be happy to debate you about it.
closing remark: the scientist sounds more peeved today than he did over two weeks ago (recheck the initial opening remarks of the harassment thread). weird. isn't tension and annoyance suppose to dissipate over a stretch of time? indeed, he sounds more troubled and harassed today than he did then. which brings me to observe that the scientist has something more to learn about human nature. was it really worth it, doc?
There appears to be no evidence of this and WCF precisely denies this. Merely repeating a statement ad nauseum does not make it true.
Separate names with a comma.