JFK Forum: Rules of Behaviour and other points

[Guest]

Poster's motivations are already being questioned, all the time. Calling people Borg, etcetera, are classic examples of this. And I think the attempt at the rule change is nothing more than trying to justify that.

Kathy

agreed

[John Simkin]

I have just sent an email with your plea to JS. FWIW, I agree he has a good prime fascia case for an exemption from a photo. Did he ever send an email directly to JS? If he doesn't have a means, pass it on to me and I'll pass it on to JS directly. Peter

I will contact Bill directly about this.

[John Dugan]

ATTETNTION, KING OF ALL MODERATORS:

Could you please make it common place or a rule, that in this Forum, people not QUOTE the whole thread when posting? If a viewer is reading the thread, there is no need to quoye the WHOLE thread all over again.

I sense that this is done, sometimes, for self promotion. As most of the large quotes, have some kind of website link or 10,000 word essay attached to it.

Negative things about extensive posts with many quotes:

1. Its very annoying to scroll through a whole page of quotes to find the post at the end

2. It takes up space on the site.

3. My roller ball on my mouse is almost work out.

4. It could prevent readers from finishing the thread due to the convoluted post of others posting 20 quotes

5. Nobody needs to read the same thing twice. One cab always go back a page or 2 to get caught up.

Please Help.

Please alert the forum to stop this abuse of quoting everything in the thread. Please.

thank you

[John Simkin]

ATTETNTION, KING OF ALL MODERATORS:

Could you please make it common place or a rule, that in this Forum, people not QUOTE the whole thread when posting? If a viewer is reading the thread, there is no need to quoye the WHOLE thread all over again.

I sense that this is done, sometimes, for self promotion. As most of the large quotes, have some kind of website link or 10,000 word essay attached to it.

Negative things about extensive posts with many quotes:

1. Its very annoying to scroll through a whole page of quotes to find the post at the end

2. It takes up space on the site.

3. My roller ball on my mouse is almost work out.

4. It could prevent readers from finishing the thread due to the convoluted post of others posting 20 quotes

5. Nobody needs to read the same thing twice. One cab always go back a page or 2 to get caught up.

Please Help.

Please alert the forum to stop this abuse of quoting everything in the thread. Please.

thank you

I agree but I doubt if the moderators have the time to edit these posts. I would like to think that members would realize it is counter-productive to quote such large chunks of text.

[John Dugan]

ATTETNTION, KING OF ALL MODERATORS:

Could you please make it common place or a rule, that in this Forum, people not QUOTE the whole thread when posting? If a viewer is reading the thread, there is no need to quoye the WHOLE thread all over again.

I sense that this is done, sometimes, for self promotion. As most of the large quotes, have some kind of website link or 10,000 word essay attached to it.

Negative things about extensive posts with many quotes:

1. Its very annoying to scroll through a whole page of quotes to find the post at the end

2. It takes up space on the site.

3. My roller ball on my mouse is almost work out.

4. It could prevent readers from finishing the thread due to the convoluted post of others posting 20 quotes

5. Nobody needs to read the same thing twice. One cab always go back a page or 2 to get caught up.

Please Help.

Please alert the forum to stop this abuse of quoting everything in the thread. Please.

thank you

I agree but I doubt if the moderators have the time to edit these posts. I would like to think that members would realize it is counter-productive to quote such large chunks of text.

I didn't mean that The Mods should be deleting posts or quotes, just let it be known that large quote repeats are shunned upon. Maybe I'll post something on the board and headline it with "Attention all Members".

thanks for the reply.

[William Kelly]

I've filed a report with the moderators to complain about Craig Lameson, who continues to attack Doug Horne personally, calling him a hack, a failure, and less of a man for not defending himself, and I don't blame him for not bothering to deal with such idiots.

Lameson might know something about photography, but he hasn't contributed one thing that has advanced our knowledge of anything, as far as I can tell, and everyone one of his posts merely attacks Horne or Fester or Healey, or other "alterationists" without discussing the issues.

I'm not even an "alterationist," and don't know that the film has been altered, but I do believe there are a lot of issues and questions that must be answered and can be if we stick to the questions, and avoid attacking each other in such simplistic terms.

Bill Kelly

[John Dolva]

I understand that there are varying degrees of paranoia in this field. Some of it is unfounded. Either way, I think it's encumbent on members to try to keep it in check.

There is also a degree of projection. For example: person x is person x, but a spectrum between y and z sees this person differently. Does that change x? Of course not. So why is there a range of attitudes? Simple: Because of there is a large range of people with attitudes. Know Thyself, then see how much of what you like or don't like, which then controls your actions, is nothing more than a mirror.

Then, IMO, there is the Ego. I have found this the hardest to battle with. Many times I have gone for a long drive for hours outback here before I can respond productively to posts. At times it overtakes me and I become it, and my posts are impulsive.

Generally I find this extremely amusing. It's incredible what a fool one can make of oneself...and then the hyenas wail, the buzzards start circling and it's not fun any more. For anyone.

Groupings. I've known from the start about background messaging and a rather predictable pattern ensues. It would be fascinating to get all the logs of the forum and create a time dimensional color dot pattern and then using that as the basis of an orchestral piece. So I choose independence. I'll talk civily with just about anyone. GPH and I who basically had diametrically opposing views on matters, ditto Tom Purvis and others, had some great exchanges, simply because we choose to be respectful of each other. We found a common ground.

At various times I've been invited by persons to join this or that grouping, but anyone who has done so will know that my answer is fundamentally no.

It's here or nowhere. But that's me. Others have different MOs.

It's a choice.

[Jack White]

I understand that there are varying degrees of paranoia in this field. Some of it is unfounded. Either way, I think it's encumbent on members to try to keep it in check.

There is also a degree of projection. For example: person x is person x, but a spectrum between y and z sees this person differently. Does that change x? Of course not. So why is there a range of attitudes? Simple: Because of there is a large range of people with attitudes. Know Thyself, then see how much of what you like or don't like, which then controls your actions, is nothing more than a mirror.

Then, IMO, there is the Ego. I have found this the hardest to battle with. Many times I have gone for a long drive for hours outback here before I can respond productively to posts. At times it overtakes me and I become it, and my posts are impulsive.

Generally I find this extremely amusing. It's incredible what a fool one can make of oneself...and then the hyenas wail, the buzzards start circling and it's not fun any more. For anyone.

Groupings. I've known from the start about background messaging and a rather predictable pattern ensues. It would be fascinating to get all the logs of the forum and create a time dimensional color dot pattern and then using that as the basis of an orchestral piece. So I choose independence. I'll talk civily with just about anyone. GPH and I who basically had diametrically opposing views on matters, ditto Tom Purvis and others, had some great exchanges, simply because we choose to be respectful of each other. We found a common ground.

At various times I've been invited by persons to join this or that grouping, but anyone who has done so will know that my answer is fundamentally no.

It's here or nowhere. But that's me. Others have different MOs.

It's a choice.

John...a good suggestion, though I doubt it would be implemented. I always look at the bottom of each

message I open to see who is looking at that moment. There is a definite pattern. About half a dozen

persons seem to be logged on at any given time, day or night...as if their only job is to continuously

monitor these forums. They also form tag-team partner groups as you say, so that when one replies

to a posting, all other members of that team start piling on. Some of these people, who allegedly work

for a living, could not possibly spend day and night here and still hold down a day job.

Like you, I am independent and belong to no gang.

Jack

[Len Colby]

I understand that there are varying degrees of paranoia in this field. Some of it is unfounded. Either way, I think it's encumbent on members to try to keep it in check.

[...]

Generally I find this extremely amusing. It's incredible what a fool one can make of oneself...

[...]

John...a good suggestion, though I doubt it would be implemented. I always look at the bottom of each message I open to see who is looking at that moment. There is a definite pattern. About half a dozen persons seem to be logged on at any given time, day or night...as if their only job is to continuously monitor these forums. They also form tag-team partner groups as you say, so that when one replies to a posting, all other members of that team start piling on. Some of these people, who allegedly work for a living, could not possibly spend day and night here and still hold down a day job.

Brilliant post John, very perceptive amazing how Jack unwitting proved your points not deleted above.

Jack, If we were agents of some mysterious agency paid to "to continuously monitor these forums" we could easily escape your detection. For one the forum has a "log on as invisible" option that your buddy Duane liked to use. We could also: log on and off, monitor the forum using one browser (which was not logged on) and post with another (which was) or alternately use a IP mask or software when simply monitoring. You really desrved to have one 1st prize in the 2007 Forum "awards"

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=130064

Here's a video for ya:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9ObLGRq33o

[John Dolva]

Jack, I often leave the browser logged on while being absent from the computer for hours. Log off and on as time permits usually means powering down and the restart with all the attendant scans and setups are tedious, though I'm getting better, with mixing it up with other things that need doing rather than twiddling my thumbs for 45 minutes issuing command after command at lengthy intervals. Then I log on, and prefer to stay so, even though not looking at the page but taking time out to refresh as regularly as possible. There is a pattern, part of which is determined by refresh rates, hence, a time dimension to such mapping. Sometimes a back and fro is sparked and sometimes days may pass. The focus doesn't. Personally I think there is something to be said for the IRC ethics in good roooms vigilantly overlooked by moderators that don not remove what one says but institute status with varying degrees of latitude and tolerance, thereby enforcing proper behaviour, where you can quite simply take it or leave it, knowing you have to push pretty hard to get region lined.

[Len Colby]

The JFK forum doesn't have two very important threads that exist on the PC one

1) A thread for members to complain about moderator actions they believe were unfair

2) A thread for moderators to record actions they've taken

a) Peter recently edited one of my posts I believe his actions unjustified

I responded to a post where he called another member "psychotic",both posts have disappeared without explanation.

If I was sent a PM my box was full and I will make space but think justification for such actions should be made publicly.

Edited February 8, 2010 by Len Colby

[Len Colby]

Peter’s intervention in this post shows why he is unfit to be a moderator

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=183130

3- There is no evidence the stabbing was related to his "research"

I can think of now way of wording a response that would not involve obscenities hurled at you for that. Callous. Insensitive. Inhuman....and wrong - accept to a Coincidence Theorist extraordiaire.

Even if Lemkin disagrees with me about the probability the attack ofnJack was research related his abusive language was uncalled for especially coming form a moderator.

4- xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

That was a very nasty ad hom I deleted. Let's not see that again. You have no respect, IMO,

His deletion of point 4 was an abuse of power. There was nothing wrong with it. Mods should NOT use their power to protect their friends from criticism. All I said was that Jack objects when people call abilities into question due to his advanced age therefore using it as a reason to cut him slack.

[Len Colby]

What happened to the Lemkin threads? I can understand them being closed but making them invisible with only fuel his sense of victimization and inevitably lead to paranoid accusations something is being covered up. In any case an announcement should have ben made.

[Pat Speer]

What happened to the Lemkin threads? I can understand them being closed but making them invisible with only fuel his sense of victimization and inevitably lead to paranoid accusations something is being covered up. In any case an announcement should have been made.

I tend to agree, Len. IF Peter asked they be taken down, however, I can understand why his request was granted. Just a thought.

[Joel D. Gruhn]

What happened to the Lemkin threads? I can understand them being closed but making them invisible with only fuel his sense of victimization and inevitably lead to paranoid accusations something is being covered up. In any case an announcement should have been made.

Forum:

1. A public meeting place for open discussion.

2. A medium for open discussion or voicing of ideas, such as a newspaper, a radio or television program, or a website.

I have to agree, Len. A moderator must be moderate and accept that everyone is not going to always agree in a spirited debate, and be able to temper his/her defensiveness.

The threads were disappeared, which to anyone would feel like like censorship rather than an open forum.

My two posts were whisked away - and they were not critical of any specific individual, any more than this one is.

I think someone is perhaps feeling a little hyper-sensitive, and if that is the case they are MORE likely to get criticism for combining censorship with a total lack of transparency. I guess we are not suppose to question authority.

Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.

George Orwell

Joel

Edited March 11, 2010 by Joel D. Gruhn