Conspiracy against this Forum

[John Simkin]

I have deleted the thread “Death of a Great Idea, when bad moderation kills a forum”. I will also delete any other thread that attacks the administrators or moderators of this forum.

It is my opinion that a small group of members are intent in severely damaging this forum before they go off to form their own forum. I am not going to allow them to destroy what I believe is important.

I have attempted to run this form in a way that would provide the maximum of freedom for members. It was the way I tried to teach my classes in school. However, I did realize as a teacher that some groups were too immature to benefit from this approach (this had nothing to do with age).

Most members have responded well to this approach. However, a small minority have always caused problems by their attacks on other members. Recently, when moderators tried to protect those being attacked, they have themselves been the target of their venom. So much so, that they have resigned from the job.

One of the ways that this group has been “rebelling” is to remove the link to their biography. Unless this is put back the member’s posts will be made invisible and they will be placed on moderation. Eventually, all their posts will be deleted from the forum. The same goes for those who do not have an identifiable photograph as an avatar.

This forum receives a large number of page views. It is an excellent resource for people who wish to publicize their opinions, books, websites, etc. because of its search-engine ranking. Members are still free to use it in this way. What they do not have the freedom to do is to make personal attacks on other members. If you do this in the future, you will be immediately dealt with. They can then go away and talk amongst themselves, convinced that they are victims of a CIA conspiracy.

[Jack White]

I have received an email from Mr. Simkin accusing me of being part of a "conspiracy"

to destroy his forum. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I have been a member

and supporter from the beginning. He has been terribly misled by someone. He invited

me to join, and personally set up an account for me. But it is his forum and clearly he

may administer it as he chooses.

Jack White

[John Simkin]

I have received an email from Mr. Simkin accusing me of being part of a "conspiracy"

to destroy his forum. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I have been a member

and supporter from the beginning. He has been terribly misled by someone. He invited

me to join, and personally set up an account for me. But it is his forum and clearly he

may administer it as he chooses.

Jack White

The same email was sent to every member of the forum. It did not accuse you personally of being involved in such a conspiracy.

[Mike Williams]

I have received an email from Mr. Simkin accusing me of being part of a "conspiracy"

to destroy his forum. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I have been a member

and supporter from the beginning. He has been terribly misled by someone. He invited

me to join, and personally set up an account for me. But it is his forum and clearly he

may administer it as he chooses.

Jack White

The same email was sent to every member of the forum. It did not accuse you personally of being involved in such a conspiracy.

But of course John!

Maybe the fact that someone thinks they were personally accused, when everyone got the mail, is an indication of the real issue!

[Mark Vernon]

I have received an email from Mr. Simkin accusing me of being part of a "conspiracy"

to destroy his forum. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I have been a member

and supporter from the beginning. He has been terribly misled by someone. He invited

me to join, and personally set up an account for me. But it is his forum and clearly he

may administer it as he chooses.

Jack White

The same email was sent to every member of the forum. It did not accuse you personally of being involved in such a conspiracy.

He does fit the profile....

[Jack White]

The email said ANYONE WHO REFUSED TO UPDATE A LINK TO THEIR BIOGRAPHY was

part of a conspiracy to wreck the forum. This OBVIOUSLY was aimed at me. There was

NO INDICATION that the message was sent to ANYONE except me.

Jack

[Len Colby]

The email said ANYONE WHO REFUSED TO UPDATE A LINK TO THEIR BIOGRAPHY was

part of a conspiracy to wreck the forum. This OBVIOUSLY was aimed at me. There was

NO INDICATION that the message was sent to ANYONE except me.

Jack

FWIW I didn't get such an e-mail

[Matthew Lewis]

I got the email and while it was addressed only to me, it was clear that it was a generic email sent to multiple people. That was further obvious when the same email was repeated word for word in a new topic on this forum.

It also did not say "ANYONE WHO REFUSED TO UPDATE A LINK TO THEIR BIOGRAPHY was part of a conspiracy to wreck the forum."

What it said was this

One of the ways that this group has been “rebelling” is to remove the link to their biography.

In fact, nowhere in the email did it say anything about a refusal to update. Perhaps Jack should read closer next time.

On a related note, I still can't understand why Jack can't just update the link in his signature. Why should he not follow the same rules as anyone else?

[Guest]

The email said ANYONE WHO REFUSED TO UPDATE A LINK TO THEIR BIOGRAPHY was

part of a conspiracy to wreck the forum. This OBVIOUSLY was aimed at me. There was

NO INDICATION that the message was sent to ANYONE except me.

Jack

It was sent to all members via the mass mail facility on the forum - I can publish the board log of this if you like Jack OR you can continue to believe that you are being persecuted. I wonder which option fits your mindset best?

[Dave Greer]

I have received an email from Mr. Simkin accusing me of being part of a "conspiracy"

to destroy his forum. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I have been a member

and supporter from the beginning. He has been terribly misled by someone. He invited

me to join, and personally set up an account for me. But it is his forum and clearly he

may administer it as he chooses.

Jack White

Jack

Is there any reason stopping you from posting a link to your bio? Everyone else on the forum is required to do so. By apparently refusing to do the same, it looks as if you're just playing the martyr by setting yourself up to be banned or moderated.

[Mike Williams]

The email said ANYONE WHO REFUSED TO UPDATE A LINK TO THEIR BIOGRAPHY was

part of a conspiracy to wreck the forum. This OBVIOUSLY was aimed at me. There was

NO INDICATION that the message was sent to ANYONE except me.

Jack

It was sent to all members via the mass mail facility on the forum - I can publish the board log of this if you like Jack OR you can continue to believe that you are being persecuted. I wonder which option fits your mindset best?

Reading comprehension does seem to be directly related to the more ......um....far fetched theorists.

Mind set.....and match!

Mike

[Evan Burton]

Just how many times has Jack done this - make an incorrect assumption leading to a baseless accusation? I've been the target several times.

Edited August 26, 2008 by Evan Burton

[Steve Mcdonagh]

Hi,

I can understand the ‘admins’ wanting to set certain rules for their forum, I can understand the ‘moderators’ trying to enforce those rules, but what I can’t understand is just how many of the members seem to be making a big deal about it.

Does it really bother you so much that Jack White doesn’t have a bio link?

I know it is forum rules and I have no problem with them, but please let the ‘admins’ and ‘mods’ resolve this problem.

The appearance some of you have been portraying (at least to me) is that you are just intent on ganging up and bashing an old man – is that really how you want to be perceived? So please, focus your attentions on educating members such as myself with your interesting viewpoints and knowledgeable research.

Thanks - Steve

[Matthew Lewis]

Jack is the one that made it an issue by repeatedly refusing to update his bio link when asked. There is also the fact that he has made it an issue in the past when other members did not have a photo that was up to his standards. If he feels he can enforce the rules should he not live by them as well?

[Mike Williams]

Just how many times has Jack done this - make an incorrect assumption leading to a baseless accusation? I've been the target several times.

Evan do you mean in research, or the forum issues? I would hope just the forum issues so as to have a manageable figure.