Jump to content
The Education Forum

JFK Forum: Rules of Behaviour and other points


John Simkin

Recommended Posts

  • 2 months later...
  • Replies 362
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I would like to file a formal complaint that Mike Rago has - five times, stepped on my Valkyrie thread posts - without good reason, and if he continues to do so, after I have politely requested him to stop - I would like to have him placed on moderation so that his posts will be read by moderators before they can be seen to prevent him from engaging further in this childish behavior.

I have also posted the link to my article at Deep Politics Forum and there is a lively discussion by over a half dozen different people about the issues the article presents.

Here, Mike Rago has stomped on it, and I object.

Bill Kelly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to file a formal complaint that Mike Rago has - five times, stepped on my Valkyrie thread posts - without good reason, and if he continues to do so, after I have politely requested him to stop - I would like to have him placed on moderation so that his posts will be read by moderators before they can be seen to prevent him from engaging further in this childish behavior.

I have also posted the link to my article at Deep Politics Forum and there is a lively discussion by over a half dozen different people about the issues the article presents.

Here, Mike Rago has stomped on it, and I object.

Bill Kelly

Are there any moderators reading these posts?

If there is, I would like them to answer Mike Rago's questions, if you think it worthwhile, as I refuse to do so anymore, and if he continues to step on my posts on my Valkyrie thread without any moderation, I guess I will have to stop posting here, as many others have done.

I will answer any specific question Mike Rago has by personal message, but I will no longer respond to him on the public forum as he is asking questions that should be known by anyone who has done even rudimentary research.

I don't have time to stop to explain or debate BS with those whose only apparent mission is to disrupt others from properly responding to new research.

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

MODERATORS - I've tried to send individual messages to a number of you, including John Simkin but apparently none of the moderators accepts personal messages on this forum.

Therefore, I am publicly asking that a moderator please correct the typo in the subject title of my post on the NARA protest.

Thanks,

Bill Kelly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to file a formal complaint that Mike Rago has - five times, stepped on my Valkyrie thread posts - without good reason, and if he continues to do so, after I have politely requested him to stop - I would like to have him placed on moderation so that his posts will be read by moderators before they can be seen to prevent him from engaging further in this childish behavior.

I agree this is a problem with this Forum. Steven Gaal also does this. If you remember, Tim Gratz used to do this. It is a difficult one to deal with. Is it bad enough to put them on moderation? I would be interested in what other members think about this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this is other than accidental or anthusiasm, and it is a problem for posters, which I think in a long run ot isn't, ( I used to get a bit annoyed when whatever I had to say was afa I was concerned annoying as what I have to say IS more important (ahem)) a post lag could help. But in the end : so what? One learns things either way. (In this case: BK is annoyed.)

edit typo

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Moderator Tom Scully made a personal attack against me in the thread linked below. It was at least the third time he had done so or insinuated I'm paid to post here, clearly violating the rules he is supposed to enforce. That post disappeared but there was no mention of this in the "Moderator actions..." thread. I would like to know who deleted/disapeared the post, was it Scully or someone else?

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=19571&pid=261047&st=0entry261047

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully

Moderator Tom Scully made a personal attack against me in the thread linked below. It was at least the third time he had done so or insinuated I'm paid to post here, clearly violating the rules he is supposed to enforce. That post disappeared but there was no mention of this in the "Moderator actions..." thread. I would like to know who deleted/disapeared the post, was it Scully or someone else?

http://educationforu...=0

You are complaining about a hidden post you say questions your motives, but you do not want the post hidden? If the post was displayed and actually did question your motives, would you be more pleased?

I have posted a reply to your nonsense in the Mod actions/announcements thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Responding to criticism of Len and Tommy, an accounting of my recent moderating activity.

(keep your knife sharpened, Len, you twist it in often and seemingly everywhere on the Ed forum, to dull the blade from over use.)

I haven't the slightest idea what you are going on about, with very few exceptions I only complain about the actions of a single member here, you, and always with ample justification. You flaunt the rules you are supposed to enforce. And now you insult me on a thread were I can't reply, you're a 'class act'.

Len authored a new thread:

http://educationforu...showtopic=19571

Jim DiEugenio replied, making the mistake of mentioning Mike Rago.

I posted in the thread and then Rago proceeded to flood the thread with OT posts.

I decided I did not want my post to remain. I could have edited out the content of my post or deleted it entirely.

Instead, I disapproved my own post, with a posted reason; any moderator or admin can read it and vouch for

the facts that the post is hidden and intact. I want it to remain in that status, as a record of what I said and when

I said it.

I split Jim's post and all of Rago's post out of Colby's thread. I stated why in the bottom of the firrst post in the "Rago"

thread, (Sorry, Jim, the author of the first post in the split off thread is auto displayed as the thread's author.)

http://educationforu...73

Edited by Tom Scully, Today, 10:13 AM.

Moved the "derailment" of Len Colby's Thread (I edited in quote of Colby's Opening Post) to a "side rail".

....on the same page as Tommy's rant, linked here:

http://educationforu...=0

I thought I had already adequately and transparently documented what I did when I did it, but that is not what the critics and the criticism is about, is it?

"Transparently" what an absurd comment it invisible to the vast majority of members, you only owned up to what you'd done AFTER I complained and others noted what you'd done.

" but that is not what the critics and the criticism is about, is it?"

So why don't you tell us what "the criticism is about"? Your paranoia and ego are really telling.

"on the same page as Tommy's rant, linked here:"

Another swipe at a member where he can't reply, hilariously ironic you would accuse another member of making a 'rant'. I did see any rants by him there, you OTOH rant all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moderator Tom Scully made a personal attack against me in the thread linked below. It was at least the third time he had done so or insinuated I'm paid to post here, clearly violating the rules he is supposed to enforce. That post disappeared but there was no mention of this in the "Moderator actions..." thread. I would like to know who deleted/disapeared the post, was it Scully or someone else?

http://educationforu...=0

You are complaining about a hidden post you say questions your motives, but you do not want the post hidden? If the post was displayed and actually did question your motives, would you be more pleased?

I have posted a reply to your nonsense in the Mod actions/announcements thread.

Yes I would like the post restored, but no I never you said you questioned my motives in THAT post, learn to read, I said you attacked me in it. The appropriate thing would have been for someone else to have edited your post, you disapearing it yourself smacks of covering your tracks.

Edited by Len Colby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully

Moderator Tom Scully made a personal attack against me in the thread linked below. It was at least the third time he had done so or insinuated I'm paid to post here, clearly violating the rules he is supposed to enforce. That post disappeared but there was no mention of this in the "Moderator actions..." thread. I would like to know who deleted/disapeared the post, was it Scully or someone else?

http://educationforu...=0

You leave me with the impression you are incoherent. Again, I acted transparently, contrary to claims posted by you and by Tommy.. My edit disclaimer at this link is time stamped:

The reason I hid a post I authored is on display for all mods and admins to read and it is time stamped. The post is available to be read by mods and admins. My motivation now for leaving the post in its current status is because I am accountable to them, but not to you,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moderator Tom Scully made a personal attack against me in the thread linked below. It was at least the third time he had done so or insinuated I'm paid to post here, clearly violating the rules he is supposed to enforce. That post disappeared but there was no mention of this in the "Moderator actions..." thread. I would like to know who deleted/disapeared the post, was it Scully or someone else?

http://educationforu...=0

You leave me with the impression you are incoherent.

You are quite right that is only your “impression" even with your eccentric resizing of the text my post was not in least bit “incoherent”.

Again, I acted transparently, contrary to claims posted by you and by Tommy.. My edit disclaimer at this link is time stamped:

Which link? How something invisible to the vast majority of members (not to mention visitors) an example of “act[ing] transparently”? If you wanted to “act[] transparently” you should said what you had done and why on this thread before being called on your failure to do so. You still haven't said why you did so, how is that 'transparent'?

And what are babbling about regarding Tommy? Where did he accuse you of acting inappropriately or “rant”? Actually it was Mike Rago (who I've never agreed with before) who quite rightly took you to task for your complete lack of transparency. Despite your delusion to the contrary mods are answerable to ordinary members.

The reason I hid a post I authored is on display for all mods and admins to read and it is time stamped. The post is available to be read by mods and admins. My motivation now for leaving the post in its current status is because I am accountable to them, but not to you,

So you think moderators are not accountable to members? Really? Even when they insult them? Even when they violate the rules they are supposed to enforce?

Edited by Len Colby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

There seems to be a thread missing made by Lee Farley.

Can a mod please post the reason?

I know he was complaining about another member and wanted that member kicked off the forum.

I know John Simkin is against doing that unless the need to act is extreme.

But I do believe members should be kept informed of what is happening.

I'm not going to go into a big spiel about the value Lee has provided here. I suspect it would fall on deaf ears because John runs this forum according to a rigid ideological set of principles - which is his right, and no one has any excuse for not understanding that fact. But still - an explanation of the ruling in each case is surely in order, and moreover, a permanent thread has been dedicated to provide just that. So why hasn't it happened?

Edited by Greg Parker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully

Greg, the thread you describe has been disapproved (thus, it is now hidden from public view) by another moderator, and the decision was submitted by that moderator for further consideration of the moderation team. It is my understanding that Lee Farley has received a message with an explanation for why his thread was disapproved.

I have limited means to attempt to stem what I have described as the "Rago Flood". I have split off posts from a thread Lee Farley authored, to a new thread titled, Rago's "Nathan Burgess Pool" at this link : http://educationforu...showtopic=19606

This is the second time I have done this in response to a "Rago Flood" of a thread. It is a stop gap and less than adequate response, especially since my initial effort has not seemed to have achieved the desired, moderating effect.:

I created this "can" to pour Mike Rago's "flood" of other threads, into. However, I am not going to go on doing it alone. The only feedback I have received for my effort had been negative, even hostile. So far, this is Ralph Cinque redux. Others need to step up.

Roger that? Over and out.

I am going to ask you to change the name of this thread. You created this thread for your own reason and your own purpose. You created the title and you put my name in that title and associated a topic that you know is not my topic. The title you picked and put my name on was for a person at some other forum that apparently you visit.

"Rago's JFK Murder was a staged event JFK wasn't killed on 11/22/63" is not something I have ever said or supported. You picked that title for your own purpose.

You created the thread , you created the title and you make some silly excuse for the purpose.

You are the moderator, you are not supposed to be fanning flames.

I am going to repeat what I said when you first created this thread ...

First an explanation.

This post was a response to DiEugenio's post above which I have quoted. I did not instigate anything. I did not flood the thread with posts. I responded to a post, by DiEugenio, that was intended to instigate. Every subsequent post by me was a response to a post by someone else.

Mr. Scully's statement in the Moderator Actions thread is not correct.

It is now very clear that more than subtle (and gentle) moderation efforts are necessary to moderate the disruptive posting pattern of this member.

I have stepped up my effort to emphasize that conclusion, in a "why am I the only one rowing?" post, ironically quoted above by Mike Rago himself!

Mike Rago continues to lead the daily list:

Today's top 20 posters

Edited by Tom Scully
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Removed two of the posts on the Q&A thread. Please do not bring up personal information on or make threats to other posters. I know this has happened before, but it should not be so. We all know we are not supposed to do this, so why do it?

This forum is a place to post research and exchange ideas. Try to keep that in mind moving forward.

If you don't like it, you are free to go somewhere else.

Kathy I realize that it’s not easy being a moderator but the expiry date of Schweitzer’s law license is a matter of public record, just as are the basic details regarding the licenses of all other past and present members of the California Bar and most, if not all, licensed professionals in the US. Additionally this information was already disclosed by Tom a few posts upstream in the same thread. So I kindly request that you either make my post visible or make Tom’s invisible. I think the validity of his law license is relevant for two reasons 1) he uses his law background as a reason for taking his claims seriously 2) he has made contradictory claims as to when he retired and the expiration date of the license suggests both were wrong, this goes to credibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...