"Len Brazil" and "Mike Williams" edit...

[Evan Burton]

Maggie,

Do Jack's rules applie to you?

I suggest this be amended to say IDENTIFIABLE FACIAL PHOTO. This would

rule out a distant photo of a man on a motorcycle or strolling the beach, or any

photo in which the face is not large and well lighted. A face in shadow or

silhouette is not suitable.

Jack

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=149441

You are currently in violation of Jack's suggestion. Is Jack right or wrong?

[Guest Gary Loughran]

Folks, if as some think, intenecide is the goal of Len Colby's presence here then everyone seems to be playing at that game.

I am of the opinion, and hope there is no disagreement, that using your proper name is a very important aspect of this forum. I know John asks this to create a better community spirit and environment of trust. This spirit of trust and self regulation is further reinforced by the use of a biography and photograph.

To those who have avatar photographs that don't clearly depict the member, can I ask that you update this please. Could those without biographies please also update this. Doing so, not only prevents petty, trivial debates and arguments; it helps maintain as 'realistic' environment for debate as possible.

If trust and self regulation amongst intelligent adults, on this forum, is found wanting that is truly sad. Perhaps it is the issue of trust is most at stake here. I think it's vital that moderators are also trusted to be impartial and fair. Sincerely I think all are and in sometimes difficult circumstances.

Love many, trust few and always paddle your own canoe as my ma says.

Edited August 8, 2008 by Gary Loughran

[Maggie Hansen]

Maggie,

Do Jack's rules applie to you?

I suggest this be amended to say IDENTIFIABLE FACIAL PHOTO. This would

rule out a distant photo of a man on a motorcycle or strolling the beach, or any

photo in which the face is not large and well lighted. A face in shadow or

silhouette is not suitable.

Jack

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=149441

You are currently in violation of Jack's suggestion. Is Jack right or wrong?

Evan,

Do you specialize in persecuting people?

Why are you doing this to me?

Ask Jack if his rules apply to me. You are the moderator. I thought I only had to abide by the forum rules.

I do not wish to drawn on this matter. It is a matter for John Simkin.

If ALL photos have to be of a particular what ever I am happy to comply. The point, not that many of the moderators seem to notice, of my posts today and my PM to you is that there are rules bent for some and others are hounded. What you or Jack think of anyones photos in particular I am not that interested in. If I have to change my photo (which will be fine by the way) I will be expecting to others having to change their photos too as they are not clear or up close.

Talk about shooting the messenger!

Edited August 8, 2008 by Maggie Hansen

[Evan Burton]

Maggie,

Do Jack's rules apply to you?

I suggest this be amended to say IDENTIFIABLE FACIAL PHOTO. This would

rule out a distant photo of a man on a motorcycle or strolling the beach, or any

photo in which the face is not large and well lighted. A face in shadow or

silhouette is not suitable.

Jack

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=149441

You are currently in violation of Jack's suggestion. Is Jack right or wrong?

Evan,

Do you specialize in persecuting people?

Why are you doing this to me?

I do not wish to drawn on this matter. It is a matter for John Simkin.

If ALL photos have to be of a particular what ever I am happy to comply. The point, not that many of the moderators seem to notice, of my posts today and my PM to you is that there are rules bent for some and others are hounded. What you or Jack think of anyones photos in particular I am not that interested in. If I have to change my photo (which will be fine by the way) I will be expecting to others having to change their photos too as they are not clear or up close.

Talk about shooting the messenger!

Your avatar does not meet Forum requirements. 'Nuff said.

[William Kelly]

I'm not that pesamistic David. I think this forum is successful at what it tries to do, and could even be more influencial and educational if the effort were made.

And as for Gary's requirement that photos be for real, I don't know if that really matters.

Photos may put a face on our names for some, but I don't think I really have to see that Don the JFK Plankwalker isn't really Clint Eastwood, or that Kathy is afraid that Don Norton will stalk her, but our names are important, and so are our identities.

If Len Colby really does teach English in Brazil, God bless him.

But if his name isn't really Len Colby, and he's not a school teacher but an officer in the Brazilian military, and he didn't really learn English at Oberlan college but took psychops at the American School for State Security at Quantaco, then that would make a difference wouldn't it?

We'd be playing different games on the same field and not even know it.

I hope Len answers these questions, including Tink and John's, and gets his web site selling Brazilian art straightened out, and he teaches correct English, and not the bastard American english they talk in New York.

BK

[Maggie Hansen]

EVAN: Oh no. John and Andy have applied a standard to every member on this Forum. You are asking that another standard be applied to Len, therefore you should provide supporting evidence why that higher standard should be applied to another member.

That is just untrue Evan. Doubt has been created about the identity of some one called Len Colby. I and others here have asked that this be clarified. I would ask the same of any other member if the circumstance were the same.

I am of the opinion, and hope there is no disagreement, that using your proper name is a very important aspect of this forum. I know John asks this to create a better community spirit and environment of trust. This spirit of trust and self regulation is further reinforced by the use of a biography and photograph.

Indeed Gary. Trust and community. Not a lot of that here today.

[Maggie Hansen]

Maggie,

Do Jack's rules apply to you?

I suggest this be amended to say IDENTIFIABLE FACIAL PHOTO. This would

rule out a distant photo of a man on a motorcycle or strolling the beach, or any

photo in which the face is not large and well lighted. A face in shadow or

silhouette is not suitable.

Jack

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=149441

You are currently in violation of Jack's suggestion. Is Jack right or wrong?

Evan,

Do you specialize in persecuting people?

Why are you doing this to me?

I do not wish to drawn on this matter. It is a matter for John Simkin.

If ALL photos have to be of a particular what ever I am happy to comply. The point, not that many of the moderators seem to notice, of my posts today and my PM to you is that there are rules bent for some and others are hounded. What you or Jack think of anyones photos in particular I am not that interested in. If I have to change my photo (which will be fine by the way) I will be expecting to others having to change their photos too as they are not clear or up close.

Talk about shooting the messenger!

Your avatar does not meet Forum requirements. 'Nuff said.

No Evan. Not enough. As I have said but some are hard of hearing I will post another photo if required by John. You are asking me if I am in violation of Jack's suggestion and my answer is I don't know. Nor do I care. Why don't you go ask Jack. You also ask Is jack right or wrong? Does it matter? Does my opinion on this matter? Is it relevant to any thing? Please.....

Edited August 8, 2008 by Maggie Hansen

[Evan Burton]

EVAN: Oh no. John and Andy have applied a standard to every member on this Forum. You are asking that another standard be applied to Len, therefore you should provide supporting evidence why that higher standard should be applied to another member.

That is just untrue Evan. Doubt has been created about the identity of some one called Len Colby. I and others here have asked that this be clarified. I would ask the same of any other member if the circumstance were the same.

Okay - you do not show an identifiable photograph, and I have doubts as to the accuracy of your name.

Please provide to the whole Forum - not just me - verifiable proof of your identity. I ask this as a Forum member, not as a Moderator.

[Guest David Guyatt]

I have to say that I am astonished at the attitude displayed here by moderators about Len's true identity. Especially when so many members here have come to the conclusion that Len is an agent provocateur and some, like Charles Drago, have been sanctioned for openly stating that view --- although he has stated that view regularly over the last year in many posts, one day last month that view proved too much it seems.

Meanwhile, it is not a hard question I posed for Len to answer... is Len Colby his true name? Nor is it a hard thing to scan a copy of his US passport and email this to John Simkin, and for John to report to the members of the forum that Len's true name is as he states.

To my view there is a terrible imbalance and inconsistency in moderation that has been going on here for awhile now. A great many members are known or can be vouchsafed for who they are. I have no problem with proving who I am and will, if it satisfies concerns, also scan and email my British passport ID page to John for him to report to the forum that I am who I say I am. I am sure there are many others who would do like wise, including Charles Drago

Using AKA's in a forum of this standing is not acceptable for absolutely the reasons Charles concludes. If a member is not prepared to stand by his own name in another forum it casts doubts on his real identity here and it is therefore hardly surprizing that this causes widespread concern amongst members.

I believe some serious thinking needs to be done on this.

Step forward Len whoever you are?

[Evan Burton]

Maggie,

Do Jack's rules apply to you?

I suggest this be amended to say IDENTIFIABLE FACIAL PHOTO. This would

rule out a distant photo of a man on a motorcycle or strolling the beach, or any

photo in which the face is not large and well lighted. A face in shadow or

silhouette is not suitable.

Jack

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=149441

You are currently in violation of Jack's suggestion. Is Jack right or wrong?

Evan,

Do you specialize in persecuting people?

Why are you doing this to me?

I do not wish to drawn on this matter. It is a matter for John Simkin.

If ALL photos have to be of a particular what ever I am happy to comply. The point, not that many of the moderators seem to notice, of my posts today and my PM to you is that there are rules bent for some and others are hounded. What you or Jack think of anyones photos in particular I am not that interested in. If I have to change my photo (which will be fine by the way) I will be expecting to others having to change their photos too as they are not clear or up close.

Talk about shooting the messenger!

Your avatar does not meet Forum requirements. 'Nuff said.

No Evan. Not enough. As I have said but some are hard of hearing I will post another photo if required by John. You are asking me if I am in violation of Jack's suggestion and my answer is I don't know. Nor do I care. Why don't you go ask Jack. You also ask Is jack right or wrong? Does it matter? Does my opinion on this matter? Is it relevant to any thing? Please.....

No, I am trying to enforce the regulations John has asked all members to abide by:

(ii) All members should use a photograph of themselves as an avatar (see below for instructions how to do this). If you still find you have problems with this please email me and I will help you with this.

Your avatar could be anything, not even identifiable as a person. As Antti has asked, please correct it.

Thank you for observing the rules of this community.

[Guest Gary Loughran]

And as for Gary's requirement that photos be for real, I don't know if that really matters.

BK

Bill, nor do I. It's not my requirement though - I believe John/Andy through forum regulations requires it. It would be my recommendation though, if even to prevent the many (and how many you have no idea) reports to moderators about bios and avatars being incorrectly displayed. As I like the idea that somehow the photo and bio are of a real person and I like the fact this adds depth to the personality. That may be my superficiality though

Generally though -

There is absolutely no fun in asking Nate, for example, to comply with with the bio tag It is not in any way, shape or form a rewarding job to do these tasks. They have to be done though and I try though to be as polite, considerate, fair and even handed in all matters - meaning treating people and views I agree with the same as those I disagree with. Again, absolutley no fun, reward or gratification in this. I have absolutely no personal - tactical or stragegic - interest in these things.

I do not look forward each morning to logging in to the myriad reported posts, many no more than a game of one-up-manship between conflicting parties.

I will say that I have found the vast and overwhelming majority of members of this forum to be extemely intelligent, well informed, humourous and mostly very pleasant to chat with in PM. The amount of folks who have privately accepted my, PMs and posted forum questions, and shared their knowledge without pride or prejudice is a tribute to the forum we have here. It is this more wholisitc view that I wish people would strive harder to protect. How each individual deals with the intermittent noise is personal choice.

[Dawn Meredith]

Charles,

I have made your post invisible because I believe it contains an inappropriate reference with regard to Len. I have notified John S and asked him to advise.

Again???? Evan, John this is so unfaiar. CD does serious rersearch. Len merely attacks. Check out his bio folks,: "GG Allin" concerts, then google GG Allin. A most fitting and admirable way to earn a living.

Dawn

[Evan Burton]

Charles,

I have made your post invisible because I believe it contains an inappropriate reference with regard to Len. I have notified John S and asked him to advise.

Again???? Evan, John this is so unfaiar. CD does serious rersearch. Len merely attacks. Check out his bio folks,: "GG Allin" concerts, then google GG Allin. A most fitting and admirable way to earn a living.

Dawn

Dawn,

I did this because I have concerns over something that was said in it. Recently a similar situation occurred, and I found that I should have acted. As I said, I have referred the matter to John to ensure that my decision is valid. If I am wrong, then his post is restored without editing - no harm done. If I am right, then he will be given the chance to edit his post, being aware of the reasons for it being considered unacceptable.

I hope you can understand. Thank you.

Edited to add: Also, Dawn, it is not my place to judge on the validity or worthiness of a members extra-forum activities. Their activities outside this Forum are none of my concern. I am only interested in what people post here, or if they post a link on this Forum to their activities outside this Forum.

Edited August 8, 2008 by Evan Burton

[Len Colby]

My initial impression is that this self-styled "journal" is a CSICOP-type operation. In other words, it may be a (professional?) operation, with a fundamentalist mission to destroy and debunk "conspiracy theories" about 9/11,

Have any basis of this belief?

using a pseudo-academic and pseudo-rigorous approach. Hence, the group's decision to term themselves a "journal" and proclaim that their "papers" are "peer-reviewed". Their "papers" may be "peer-reviewed" but who chooses the peers and ensures objectivity?

Sounds sorta like the Journal of 9/11 Studies, why don't you ask them the same questions, ask them why they keep a paper online they no to be false. OUr peer review process is basiclly the same as theirs.

Now, imagine if arch-sceptic James "The Amazing" Randi posted on the Education Forum. It would be important for we members to know that were debating with Randi, and that Randi was backed by the resources and research of CSICOP.

Do you have any evidence for this claim?

So, it is important to learn as much as we can about this self-styled "Journal of Debunking 911 Conspiracy Theories" and "Colby"'s affiliation and relationship with them.

No mysteries, I'm an "advisor" the journal publishes papers that debunk silly 9/11 rubbish. If you want to try to point out any major flaws in any of the papers there knock yourself out.

[Len Colby]

My God this has gone beyond stupid,

• Yes my name is, Len (actually Leonard) Colby.
  
• As Evan pointed out most people use screen names at other forums I’m sure many members of this one use screen names elsewhere.
  
• No other member AFAIK has been asked to establish who they are, I will only do so if asked by John or Andy, and even then if they offer reasonable justification for singling me out for such a requirement.
  
• I have been open here about my use of LenBrazil elsewhere. I even drew attention to a forum and a specific thread where I use it http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=54016
  
• Lenbrazil is also the name I use at PhotoBucket. If you check the properties of any of my images that I posted they have urls that begin http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l281/lenbrazil/
  
• I have even posted links to such images in a few posts. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...%2Flenbrazil%2F
  
• And as Kathy and Dave pointed out calling myself LenBrazil is a bit obvious if I wished to conceal my identity when I call myself Len and tell people I live in Brazil.
  
• It has already been established based on my IP address that I’m in Brazil so it would be quite a coincidence if I happened to live here and it were my last name.
  
• As for Maggies “point” that people normally use their real names at peer reviewed journals, that is the truth but JOD911 is no ordinary peer reviewed journal. Two of the advisors use obvious pseudonyms (Shagster and Debunking911) and three use partial pseudonyms (JamesB, ScottS and me). Calling it “peer reviewed” was meant to be a tongue in cheek stab at the “Journal of 9/11 Studies” which makes the same claim but apparently their only peer review process is posting articles on a closed forum before publication.
  
• I answered Tink’s question via e-mail I hadn’t noticed John’s question till now but my site is still at the same address www.brazilianartsandmusic.com, however due to a billing dispute with the host they converted me to a free site.
  
• Jan – As for your expectation that I am under some sort of obligation to answer your questions, I asked you 2 questions about Hardrup’s retraction on RFK thread a couple of time and you have yet to reply. If you answer mine I’ll answer yours.
  

Edited August 8, 2008 by Len Colby