David Andrews Posted August 3, 2018 Share Posted August 3, 2018 (edited) Pardon my earlier indelicacy. There was something about DVP's post that irked me. Edited August 3, 2018 by David Andrews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted August 3, 2018 Share Posted August 3, 2018 What if a banned member discovers something useful, or formulates a theory that I think is a good possibility? If I mention it here and give credit to the banned person, will I be penalized? What if I repeat on this forum what a banned member wrote on another forum -- because I think it is important or useful -- but I don't know the person is banned from this forum, will I be penalized? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kathleen Collins Posted August 3, 2018 Share Posted August 3, 2018 James, Gary Mack used to ask me to give his opinion on things, which I would do on this forum possibly and another forum. But I always said, "Gary Mack says..." Kathy C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James R Gordon Posted August 3, 2018 Author Share Posted August 3, 2018 Sandy, I can see what you are trying to distinguish between. The problem is that in either case you have become a surrogate for the banned member. The banned member's views - and why these views are considered to be important, have now been placed on the forum. In a number of instances it was these views - and how they were expressed - that was what got the member banned in the first place. I can appreciate why it could be argued that there should be exceptions to the rule. But the moment the forum allows exceptions then the rule will effectively disintegrate. So - I am sorry - but there can be no exceptions. James. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James R Gordon Posted August 3, 2018 Author Share Posted August 3, 2018 Kathleen, I agree with the way you wanted to give credit to the views of Gary Mack. Gary Mack would never be affected by this ruling: he was never banned. But if - for example - you said X was the view of Brian Doyle that would be different. Because - unlike the late Gary Mack - Brian was banned and Gary was never banned. He just did not post because of conflict with his position. James. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted August 3, 2018 Share Posted August 3, 2018 (edited) 39 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said: What if a banned member discovers something useful, or formulates a theory that I think is a good possibility? If I mention it here and give credit to the banned person, will I be penalized? What if I repeat on this forum what a banned member wrote on another forum -- because I think it is important or useful -- but I don't know the person is banned from this forum, will I be penalized? Good questions, Sandy. As a general rule, I think James Gordon's newest forum rule is a good one. But I also think that in order for someone to be penalized, the person posting the banned person's material must have knowledge of the "banned" status of the quoted person. That's only fair, right? And why in the world would every member here be aware of the "banned or not banned" status of all other members? It's not reasonable to think that such information is known by everybody here---or that everybody would even care about knowing such info. I certainly don't care about such things. For example, I was not aware of the banned status of the fellow named Doyle until today. So that seems like it'd be a problem for the EF staff --- how can the moderators prove that a member knows that another person has been officially banned from posting at EF? Seems to me like the best policy would be to warn the offender first (to allow for the very real possibility that the offender had no idea that he/she was posting stuff from a "banned" member), and if a second occurrence of the violation takes place, then penalize the offender. Edited August 3, 2018 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted August 3, 2018 Share Posted August 3, 2018 14 minutes ago, James R Gordon said: Sandy, I can see what you are trying to distinguish between. The problem is that in either case you have become a surrogate for the banned member. The banned member's views - and why these views are considered to be important, have now been placed on the forum. In a number of instances it was these views - and how they were expressed - that was what got the member banned in the first place. I can appreciate why it could be argued that there should be exceptions to the rule. But the moment the forum allows exceptions then the rule will effectively disintegrate. So - I am sorry - but there can be no exceptions. James. James, Just so you know, I am not a friend of Bryan Doyle. I disagree with him a lot and his persistence has often annoyed me. But I recall a time when he came up with something that I embraced. And I made comments on it on this forum. Suppose that, some time in the future, I mention some such thing without mentioning the name of the banned member that came up with the idea. Will I be penalized? Is it the name that is important not to mention? Here's a perfect case in point: Thomas Graves has some ideas that I believe may be correct. Whenever I've brought up such a topic on this forum I've tried to give him credit so it doesn't sound like I'm taking the credit. I've done this many times. Now, I haven't seen Tommy post here in quite a while. He may be banned... I don't know. Will you please tell me what I am allowed to do? Do I need to stifle myself whenever I wish to talk about these ideas that I embrace myself? Or am I allowed to talk about these things as long as I don't mention Tommy's name? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Mitcham Posted August 3, 2018 Share Posted August 3, 2018 If you think a banned poster has come up with a good idea or solution to a problem, there is nothing to stop you from posting it in your own words. It is when banned members own postings from other forums, are reposted here, that IMO the line is crossed. I have no objection to certain members good ideas, but I certainly have objections to certain members, who appear cause dissension wherever and whenever they post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James R Gordon Posted August 3, 2018 Author Share Posted August 3, 2018 I agree Ray. The operative phrase is that the idea is posted in the members own words. It is probably better if the source of the idea - the banned member - is not referenced. This way the member has found and idea they believe is interesting and shared it with the forum. Referencing the banned member allows interpretation that it is the banned member and his ideas that are being posted. James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted August 3, 2018 Share Posted August 3, 2018 5 hours ago, James R Gordon said: The operative phrase is that the idea is posted in the members own words. It is probably better if the source of the idea - the banned member - is not referenced. Thanks James, that is a good and very reasonable rule IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Morissette Posted August 4, 2018 Share Posted August 4, 2018 Interesting thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Morissette Posted August 4, 2018 Share Posted August 4, 2018 Is James Fetzer a banned member? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James R Gordon Posted August 4, 2018 Author Share Posted August 4, 2018 Denis, James Fetzer is not a member. He may have been at some point, but he is not listed in the current membership. James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Morissette Posted August 5, 2018 Share Posted August 5, 2018 48 minutes ago, James R Gordon said: Denis, James Fetzer is not a member. He may have been at some point, but he is not listed in the current membership. James Thanks for the info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted August 5, 2018 Share Posted August 5, 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, Denis Morissette said: Is James Fetzer a banned member? Professor James H. Fetzer was definitely an active member of this forum in circa 2009—2010, as the three threads linked below (all started by Fetzer) would indicate. And he almost certainly was "banned" at some point after 2010, otherwise his name in these posts would still be presented as a clickable link that leads to a profile page. But he's now listed as only a "Guest" in these threads and his name can't be clicked on.... http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/14121-did-zapruder-take-the-zapruder-film/ http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/15173-six-seconds-in-dallas-truth-or-obfuscation/ http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/15218-did-josiah-thompson-rip-off-david-lifton/ Side note.... Even though Jim Fetzer can no longer post anything here at EF, I'm glad to see that his old posts are still visible here at this forum, instead of having them totally wiped out for all time (like John Simkin did with banned members' posts a few years ago, such as with my own EF posts from 2006 and James DiEugenio's contributions from 2010—2013, all of which were wiped out with the click of a button by Simkin). It's good to have the ability to search for even a banned person's posts and have the material still available for viewing, like those threads linked above that were started by Prof. Fetzer. Edited August 5, 2018 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts