Evan Burton

Why should Jan Klimkowski submit to you modifying his words because you misunderstood, or choose to misrepresent, what they said. Rather you should have apologized to him for getting the wrong end of the stick and reinserted his original post.

Because exactly the same situation occurred not long ago, where Jan believed Len compared him to a holocaust denier, and I failed to act. Does Len not deserve the same treatment as anyone else?

The compromise offer would have made clear what he meant without the possibility of it being interpreted as being directed at Len. At least two moderators read the comment as being directed at Len.

The thread about psyops has been deleted; if you care to repost it - ensuring it conforms to the standards expected - then there will be no problems.

Our local paper has described how Canada is undergoing a resurgence of calls for Canada to "cut the colonial ties" with the Queen. There are similar calls in Australia, for us to become a republic.

I'm not a monarchist, but neither am I in favour of a republic. I'm happy with the status quo.

What about our Canadian forum members? Are you in favour of Canada cutting ties with the Queen, I suppose becoming a republic? Do you want things to remain as they are? Why?

Just interested.

A lot of truth in that article.

David,

I thought it was made quite clear: threads which question a member's reasons for posting are prohibited. Len uses a different screen name on a different forum. That is none of this Forum's concern. If people have issues with what Len posts on this Forum, then address those issues. Post arguments as to why what he says is wrong. Demonstrate why his thinking is flawed, or his sources are inaccurate.

Do not question WHY he posts. Do not call him - or any member - an agent provocateur or accuse them of posting disinformation.

Discredit his arguments, not him.

If people start threads or make posts that violate those principles, the threads / posts will be deleted.

With respect to Jan, he is free to post here at any time. I simply offered a compromise regarding a post. He says he did not receive the PM with the compromise, so I asked permission to post the details of the compromise on the thread. That way he could see what I offered and could decide if he was reasonable or not.

Jan refused me permission to post the details of the compromise offer. Seeing how he has stated that he never received the PM and does not wish to be a part of the Forum, I feel I can now publicly state what that compromise was.

There was a post of Jan's that I felt could be interpreted as calling another Forum member a xxxx. Kathy alerted me to the fact that Jan did not intend for it to be taken in that manner. I pointed out that despite that it was not intended that way, it could be interpreted that way. As you are aware, we strongly discourage the use of the words xxxx, lying, etc.

In order to allow Jan's feelings to be made known and yet remain within the forum rules, I suggested that we alter his original words:

"What a crock of lying, disinformational, BS."

to read

"That website is a crock of deceitful, disinformational, BS." (or something very similar)

That way it is quite clear than Jan is referring to the website, and not Len.

The offer is still there if Jan wishes to discuss it. He will need to, however, put his photo back up in accordance with the Forum rules. As of this time, he has replaced his avatar photo with an emoticon.

Strange, Jan - everyone else seems to receive my PMs but you. Then when I post the PMs, you complain.

May I have your permission to post the text of the PM I sent to your this morning?

This is not the case Evan. Not everyone receives PM's when they should. Michael Hogan has stated this emphatically in the Len Brazil post.

All my posts today have been deleted. No explanation, no PM from anyone. I am not aware of any forum rule that I have broken, unless there is a new rule I am unfamiliar with, that criticism of moderators decisions are outlawed.

David

The following is the text of the second thread I started (the first having disappeared into the void):

Thread title: Deleted thread, Len Brazil, James Randi etc.

Quote

As usual, no PM advising it is to be deleted or why... it's just gone.

Explanation please? Who deleted it and why?

The sub text of the deleted thread focused on the Journal of Debunking911 Conspiracies, Len Brazil's involvement with that suspect body and went on to ask if a psyops team was operating in the Education Forum. It continued by providing a link (see below) and the text of an Alex Constantine article about the arch debunker James Randi of CSICOP, his CIA connections, false memory syndrome and ritual abuse of children --- subjects that are at the front of those discussed in this forum. (see: http://alexconstantine.blogspot.com/2008/0...trol-fmsf.html).

It also raised growing concerns about bias in moderation - a subject that can hardly be helped by the deletion of the new thread in question.

I consider the post I made as fair and reasonable and aimed at informng other members who are less familiar with the alleged association that may connect debunking with US military and intelligence based psyops.

Unquote

Still no explanation why this and other threads/posts of mine have been deleted today.

***

Jan has left the forum. I will join him in due course and when I'm ready to do so. Others have signaled the same intention too, following some quite inappropriate (imo) moderating decisions. Hopefully tis post will not be deleted or set to invisible as I am under no sanction that I have been advised of. I am formally writing to John Simkin stating that I have lost all confidence in Evan as a Moderator. I don't expect a reply or acknowledgement.

Charles, how many times do you have to be told that calling another Forum member an "agent provocateur" or similar is not acceptable? John has said so himself.

If you disagree with what someone has said, then attack their argument - not the person.

I sent a response to you. I didn't keep a copy, but sent a CC to another Mod.

To upload a new avatar, click on MY CONTROLS.

In the new window, look for the heading PERSONAL PROFILE. Under it, click on the label marked EDIT AVATAR SETTINGS.

Select the appropriate choice (URL or upload).

If you are getting a message telling you you have exceeded allowance or other message preventing you from uploading an avatar, please let me or another Mod know and we'll try to fix it ASAP.

Thank you for attempting to change your avatar - it is appreciated.

Evan

I am not changing my avatar. I have not heard from John. Will be happy to do so if he wishes but since he posted it originally I can only assume that it is okay.

I am trying to post some pictures of some very interesting aircraft in the political discussions thread.

Oh, okay.

Firstly, your avatar does not meet our standards. It needs to show at least a face, in order to make things more personal. A number of members have had to change their avatars to comply with this. If you feel there is a valid reason why you should not have to comply with this rule, please contact Jon or Andy directly via PM and request a waiver from this requirement.

As far as the uploads are concerned, are you getting a message that your upload limit has been exceeded? If so, you need to ask John or Andy for a greater allowance. In the meantime, I can host the images on my photobucket website, if you like, and you can link to them there. Send me a PM and I'll give you an e-mail address to send the images to.

Charles,

If you have a complaint, put it in here. Do NOT continually make new threads when you have been told they will be deleted. Use the appropriate thread.

Thank you.

I sent a response to you. I didn't keep a copy, but sent a CC to another Mod.

To upload a new avatar, click on MY CONTROLS.

In the new window, look for the heading PERSONAL PROFILE. Under it, click on the label marked EDIT AVATAR SETTINGS.

Select the appropriate choice (URL or upload).

If you are getting a message telling you you have exceeded allowance or other message preventing you from uploading an avatar, please let me or another Mod know and we'll try to fix it ASAP.

Thank you for attempting to change your avatar - it is appreciated.

Evan

A copy of Jan's post has been sent to John and Andy.

The last time I complained about Evan Burton's moderation, he was found to be in the wrong and apologized to me on three counts.

However, he has carried on harassing certain posters including but not limited to Jack White, David Guyatt, Maggie Hansen, Michael Hogan, Charles Drago, David G Healy and myself, whilst protecting others such as "Colby".

I hereby give notice to the Education Forum that I refuse to be moderated by Evan Burton. This time, I will not accept any apologies for his behaviour since it's clear that there has been no attempt to control his actions since he last apologized.

If the Education Forum insist that Evan Burton continues to be a moderator, then my account should be deleted and all traces of my presence on this message board should be erased as I withdraw all consent to having my words published here.

I've also posted this message in the Complaints thread.

Noted for John and Andy's attention.

So I cannot post the the PM I sent to you - and others - about a compromise.

Jan, do you have such a low opinion of me that you think that I would claim to have sent a PM to people without sending a copy to others? Why do you think John is so inundated with PMs - because I have to CC him on everything I send, because certain people claim that I never sent them. He is well aware that every time time I have said I have sent a message, I have sent him a copy. I don't do this anymore because John's mailbox in becoming inundated with trivial matters such as this. Instead I CC other moderators.

You deny the existence of the PM, and you refuse to allow me to show proof I sent the PM to you.

I cannot do more than I have. In accordance with your request - unless you choose otherwise (and I hope you do) - I will let the Admins know you wish your account deleted.

Strange, Jan - everyone else seems to receive my PMs but you. Then when I post the PMs, you complain.

May I have your permission to post the text of the PM I sent to your this morning?

John Simkin has made his requirements clear. I also offered you a reasonable compromise with respect to your post. I have not heard a reply from you regards that compromise.

I would sincerely regret your leaving this Forum, but if you choose to do so, I cannot stop you.

Okay - I tried. I said I simply did not understand what you wanted me to address. You won't point it out, then I won't bother to answer it; it can't have been that important then.

You are entitled to your opinion. If you change your mind, let me know and I'll try to answer it to the best of my ability.

That's okay - you have chosen what type of example you wish to set for others.

BTW, are you willing to point out what I failed to address in Maggie's post? I will try to answer it, but I simply do not understand what I am missing. If you point it out, I will try to answer it.

Hi Dan,

Welcome to the Forum!

I am a Massachusetts native who attended suburban Boston public schools K-12, then earned a BA in Chemistry from Lawrence University in Appleton, Wisconsin. I have worked in the chemical industry (polymers/adhesives/sealants) for the past 10 years in the Boston area and have been interested in Nixon, and Watergate in particular, ever since my father brought a battered copy of All The President's Men home from the Library's used book sale when I was about 12 years old. Folks I've known, in college and since, have seen the many Nixon and/or Watergate books I own and not been quite sure what to think. When I came across the forum a few years back I realized that this was a place I felt comfortable. I've read a good bit about the JFK assassination as well. The topics discussed here are a hobby for me, but one that can get obsessive if I'm not careful. After all, I do have other interests and things to do - such as working, handbell ringing, baseball, working out, genealogy, travel, friends, etc.

As a scientist, I try to bring an open mind to discussions and to focus on supportable / documentable evidence. Where evidence conflicts is where our judgement on the quality of evidence, as well as on the people involved and their motivations, becomes critical.

I have a theory that people who are interested in history (which everyone should be, even if everyone isn't) tend to be most interested in the time period just before they were born. I think this is because interested people realize that history is generally orderly and accumulative, and that the period just before our birth is one that we individually don't remember but that provides a framework for understanding many things in the world we are in right now. Such it is that I (as a 'bicentennial baby,' born in 1976) am interested in the Nixon era. Unfortunately, not only do many people seem to unquestioningly believe everything they are taught in school about history, but also, by the time a US History course gets around to post-1950 America, it is near the end of the academic period so the learning is very compressed and both teachers and students are tired. So, many people assume that Watergate or the JFK assassination are well understood (which of course they aren't). All of this translates into a population that accepts many modern-day assertions made by government or the media as true without attempting to dig deeper.

I look forward to posting on the forum and continuing to learn more about Watergate and the JFK Assassination, and how both still resonate and are painfully relevant to understanding 2008 America.

I stand corrected, Michael - you are quite right. We should, at all times, seek to have accuracy in our spelling and grammar.

With regard to who insulted who first, you could set an example for others and be the first to finish it. That is up to you.

Gentlemen, please! This has nothing to do with the pilot skills of the hijackers.

We all make spelling mistakes from time to time.

I believe the accuracy to which John seeks is in providing accurate information in your posts.

That was my error, Jack - I saw the old link at the bottom of the page - which does not work - and didn't notice the link placed in the post above.

I have restored the post.

Instead of having to manually place the link in each post, you can have it done automatically in the form of a signature. Simply go to MY CONTROLS, then under PERSON PROFILE click on the link labeled EDIT SIGNATURE. A text box will appear. Paste the URL for your bio into the box, then click on UPDATE MY SIGNATURE.

This ensure it appears in ALL your posts.

I PROTEST THIS RIDICULOUS "MODERATION". MY BIOGRAPHY IS IRRELEVANT

TO MY RESEARCH. EVERYONE KNOWS WHO I AM. IF MR. SIMKIN DESIRES MY

BIO, I HAVE PROVIDED IT TO HIM. HE CAN REPLACE IT, SINCE HE WAS THE ONE

WHO ORIGINALLY POSTED IT. FOR THAT MATTER, ANY MODERATOR CAN DO

ANYTHING WITH ANY POST, AS YOU HAVE DEMONSTRATED NUMEROUS TIMES.

I WOULD SAY WHAT I REALLY THINK, BUT IT IS AGAINST FORUM "RULES."

TO DELETE RESEARCH OVER A NONSENSICAL TECHNICALITY IS ABSURD!

YOU HAVE REVEALED YOUR TRUE ROLE HERE.

Jack

http://library.uta.edu/findingAids/AR407.jsp

Once again, you are wrong. Mods CANNOT place the bio link into your personal profile; you have to do this. You have been told this multiple times now. We have extended every courtesy to you to enable you to follow this very simple procedure. If you don't want to follow the Forum rules, then you must be prepared to accept the consequences of such inaction. Your choice.

Edited to Add: BTW, it is not my responsibility to go to each and every post you have made and place your bio link in there. If you would quit being so seemingly obstinate and follow the simple procedure detailed above, then the link to your bio would appear in ALL your posts and then we could make them visible again.

In regard to your "demand" that John be informed of your "protest", he has been quite clear and specific in what he expects. If you wish to PM with a complaint, you are free to do so, however I will not bother John yet again for simply carrying out our duties.

Jack informs me that Evan Burton has notified him that he (Jack) is banned from this Forum?

Is this so?

Charles

Once again, utterly wrong.

I have NOT said any such thing.

I have NOT said anything like that.

I do NOT have those powers.

People have been told this time and time again.

Thread locked pending deletion.

That was my error, Jack - I saw the old link at the bottom of the page - which does not work - and didn't notice the link placed in the post above.

I have restored the post.

Instead of having to manually place the link in each post, you can have it done automatically in the form of a signature. Simply go to MY CONTROLS, then under PERSON PROFILE click on the link labeled EDIT SIGNATURE. A text box will appear. Paste the URL for your bio into the box, then click on UPDATE MY SIGNATURE.

This ensure it appears in ALL your posts.

Thread locked pending a decision on its deletion.

Jack,

You posts have been made invisible. They will be made visible when you place a bio link in your signature line, as required by the Forum rules, as requested by John S, as requested by various Mods, and in accordance with the same rules that apply to everyone else.

Jan did so - why can't you?

Jan,

The post will remain invisible until John has reviewed it.

EDITED TO ADD: I have made my post #63 invisible as per your request. However, your post can be taken as calling another member a banned word, regardless of how unintentional that may have been. At least two mods have read it that way, therefore it will remain invisible until otherwise advised.

Jan,

I notice that you also do not have your biography linked at the bottom of your posts. Could you please do so as soon as possible? If you need assistance to do so, myself or another mod will be happy to help.

Thanks.