Request that personal attack be removed!

[Dean Hagerman]

I protest the continued ad hominem attacks by those who disagree with a member's postings. I request

that this feature be deleted. It is not a useful feature and provides an anonymous tool for enemies to

make false attacks.

Of course we could use it to report negatively about every posting of Burton, Lamson, Colby, et al.

But that would only highlight the negativity of this feature.

Jack

LOL! The soap opera "As Jack White Turns" continues.

For that cheap shot on Jack I just lowered your reputation by a single point Craig

And before you make fun of me my wife watches "Days of our Lives" not "As the World Turns" (just want you to get the right soap opera for the coming ad-hom your about to lay on me lol)

[Jack White]

I protest the continued ad hominem attacks by those who disagree with a member's postings. I request

that this feature be deleted. It is not a useful feature and provides an anonymous tool for enemies to

make false attacks.

Of course we could use it to report negatively about every posting of Burton, Lamson, Colby, et al.

But that would only highlight the negativity of this feature.

Jack

LOL! The soap opera "As Jack White Turns" continues.

For that cheap shot on Jack I just lowered your reputation by a single point Craig

And before you make fun of me my wife watches "Days of our Lives" not "As the World Turns" (just want you to get the right soap opera for the coming ad-hom your about to lay on me lol)

I protest this ridicule by Lamson.

Jack

[Pat Speer]

I protest the continued ad hominem attacks by those who disagree with a member's postings. I request

that this feature be deleted. It is not a useful feature and provides an anonymous tool for enemies to

make false attacks.

Of course we could use it to report negatively about every posting of Burton, Lamson, Colby, et al.

But that would only highlight the negativity of this feature.

Jack

I agree with you Jack that it is not a useful feature. On the aaj newsgroup, moderated by McAdams, there are a few LNers who give every post by a CT a 1 star rating, no matter how well-reasoned, and most every post by a LN--particularly ones in which CTs are called idiots or worse--a 5 star rating. As only a few people bother to use the ratings, moreover, these 1 star and 5 star ratings persist through the life of the thread. It is therefore meaningless.

NOW, if EVERY person reading a post was in some way required to comment on it before moving to the next post, the results might prove interesting. But as it is...it only provides those who love to pick on you another way to do so. Consider it a badge of some sort.

I looked at mine, and I get a neutral rating...which means either that I'm equally hated and loved by those using the ratings, or that nobody gives a crud.

Edited August 8, 2010 by Pat Speer

[John Simkin]

Mr. Simkin has determined that JACK WHITE HAS A BAD REPUTATION and says so on my "profile".

This is a violation of forum rules that no ad hominem attacks be made on members. This should

be removed immediately!

Jack

I have never rated any member's posts. I did not even know about the feature. Evan, do you know if it is possible to disable the rating system?

[Craig Lamson]

I protest the continued ad hominem attacks by those who disagree with a member's postings. I request

that this feature be deleted. It is not a useful feature and provides an anonymous tool for enemies to

make false attacks.

Of course we could use it to report negatively about every posting of Burton, Lamson, Colby, et al.

But that would only highlight the negativity of this feature.

Jack

LOL! The soap opera "As Jack White Turns" continues.

For that cheap shot on Jack I just lowered your reputation by a single point Craig

And before you make fun of me my wife watches "Days of our Lives" not "As the World Turns" (just want you to get the right soap opera for the coming ad-hom your about to lay on me lol)

Did you lower Jack for his cheap shots on this thread Dean or do you have a double standard?

Edited August 8, 2010 by Craig Lamson

[Craig Lamson]

I protest this ridicule by Lamson.

Jack

What about your own ridicule in this very thread Jack? Do you protest yourself? Or do you work on a double standard? Inquiring minds what to know?

Edited August 8, 2010 by Craig Lamson

[Jack White]

Mr. Simkin has determined that JACK WHITE HAS A BAD REPUTATION and says so on my "profile".

This is a violation of forum rules that no ad hominem attacks be made on members. This should

be removed immediately!

Jack

I have never rated any member's posts. I did not even know about the feature. Evan, do you know if it is possible to disable the rating system?

Thank you, John!

It is one of Evan's tools of hate.

Jack

[Evan Burton]

Mr. Simkin has determined that JACK WHITE HAS A BAD REPUTATION and says so on my "profile".

This is a violation of forum rules that no ad hominem attacks be made on members. This should

be removed immediately!

Jack

I have never rated any member's posts. I did not even know about the feature. Evan, do you know if it is possible to disable the rating system?

I don't know but will look. If it is possible, I'll turn it off.

[Evan Burton]

Mr. Simkin has determined that JACK WHITE HAS A BAD REPUTATION and says so on my "profile".

This is a violation of forum rules that no ad hominem attacks be made on members. This should

be removed immediately!

Jack

I have never rated any member's posts. I did not even know about the feature. Evan, do you know if it is possible to disable the rating system?

Thank you, John!

It is one of Evan's tools of hate.

Jack

That's way out of line, Jack.

[John Dolva]

With the forum being as it is at times, personally on first thought this feature could be an interesting indicator for various things that might have nothing to do with a rating but because logs are kept it helps to build a picture of the forum and its members. I agree, WAY out of line, Jack.

edit:typo

Edited August 8, 2010 by John Dolva

[Dean Hagerman]

I protest the continued ad hominem attacks by those who disagree with a member's postings. I request

that this feature be deleted. It is not a useful feature and provides an anonymous tool for enemies to

make false attacks.

Of course we could use it to report negatively about every posting of Burton, Lamson, Colby, et al.

But that would only highlight the negativity of this feature.

Jack

LOL! The soap opera "As Jack White Turns" continues.

For that cheap shot on Jack I just lowered your reputation by a single point Craig

And before you make fun of me my wife watches "Days of our Lives" not "As the World Turns" (just want you to get the right soap opera for the coming ad-hom your about to lay on me lol)

Did you lower Jack for his cheap shots on this thread Dean or do you have a double standard?

I could care less about the rating system, I thought you would be able to tell that I was joking

[Jack White]

It is Burton, Lamson and Colby that are always out of line with personal attacks. They all came here to attack my Apollo

moon hoax studies, from a vicious website called BadAstronomy.

I can remember when Burton's signature line on all his postings was LITTLE WHITE LIES...implying all my postings were lies.

All he has done ever since is harass me. There were the long episodes after he was made moderator where he repeatedly

put me on moderation for using the word CRAP.

I have a long memory. Some here do not.

Jack

[Jonathan Cohen]

It is Burton, Lamson and Colby that are always out of line with personal attacks. They all came here to attack my Apollo

moon hoax studies, from a vicious website called BadAstronomy.

I can remember when Burton's signature line on all his postings was LITTLE WHITE LIES...implying all my postings were lies.

All he has done ever since is harass me. There were the long episodes after he was made moderator where he repeatedly

put me on moderation for using the word CRAP.

I have a long memory. Some here do not.

Jack

To "attack" your studies? So anybody who disagrees with your theories is automatically attacking you? I guess I'm not surprised you view it like this, considering the Clavius Web site (http://www.xmission.com/~jwindley/) has authoritatively refuted every single point that Moon hoax theorists like yourself believe is true.

[John Dolva]

groan

[Craig Lamson]

This from a guy who needs to draw "artifacts" in photos so that he can claim they are there.

You're a real piece of work, Lamson.

Yet another poor loser nutjob checks in...

You can try your best YET AGAIN to refute the unimpeachable...that there is a 3+ inch fold of fabric on JFK's back in Betzner.

Show us your stuff cliffy...