Behaviour of Members

[Duane Daman]

When I first joined this forum I was hoping for meaningful and intelligent discussions about my favorite subject , the Apollo moon hoax ... I mainly joined this forum to be supportive of my mentor Jack White .... I have admired Jack's works for a long time now and was hoping to help defend one of his causes here , exposing the Apollo photography as being faked .

At first I tried to be a peacemaker with those who had been constantly attacking and insulting Jack on the Political Conspiracies forum .... but soon it became very evident to me that no matter how much I asked certain members to be civil towards him , the personal insults still continued ... Then , because of my defense of Jack and also because of my opinions about Apollo , I also became the target of their ad homs .

I don't need to name any names because for anyone who has read this forum , it is very obvious who these members are who constantly use personal attacks instead of meaningful debate about the Apollo subject .... Then unfortunatley , because of the constant name calling directed at me , I also became as abusive and insulting in some of my posts to the members who were now being as insulting to me as they were to Jack .... So in allowing my buttons to be pushed I became as guilty as my attackers with some of my insulting posts ...

The smart thing to do would have been for me to ignore them .. but unfortunatley I chose to lower myself to their level and fought back ... A decision which I now very much regret ...

I am sorry for my contribution in being a problem here and have now decided to completely ignore the members who have been so unkind to both Jack and myself because of our stance on the Apollo Program .

I have much respect for Jack and his ability to not be dragged down to the level of his abusers ... I hope to learn by his example of remaining a gentleman and if allowed to stay on this forum I promise not to engage in any more conduct which is beneath my own previous standards ... Duane

Edited February 2, 2007 by Duane Daman

[Myra Bronstein]

Perhaps the forum could adopt a stock insult, a particular statement that anyone can make about a fellow member, as long as the person utilizing the insult immediately returns to civility. This would be the only insult allowed on the forum, as long as the insult is used infrequently and with discretion, reserved only for someone who absolutely deserves to be insulted.

Here are two insults, personal favorites of mine, either one of which I think would be a good stock insult for the forum:

"He/she has all the attributes of a dog except loyalty."

"If he/she was any dumber he/she would have to be watered twice a week."

Other forum members may have personal favorites to suggest. Just remember, though, that there is a psychological phenomenon known as spontaneous trait transference. The traits you describe in other people will be applied to you as well, however unconsciously, by the person(s) you're describing them to. You become associated with the characteristics you describe. So beware of this boomerang effect in insulting other people.

That's the best idea I've every heard Ron!

Here's my entry:

"Is that your nose or are you eating a banana?"

Hang on a minute, girly man.

I believe I already made that suggestion way back in post #2. (I like your entry, though)

It's on the record. Read it and weep.

Ron is already showered with adulation. (I think he's a serial glory hogger)

That's "Ms Girly Man" to you... banana nose.

Though I did look back at post #2 and the record supports your assertion that you are due some glory, and perhaps compensation for pain and suffering.

I now foresee a thread discussing how to handle the rash of plagiarism on the ed forum.

[Myra Bronstein]

When I first joined this forum I was hoping for meaningful and intelligent discussions about my favorite subject , the Apollo moon hoax ... I mainly joined this forum to be supportive of my mentor Jack White .... I have admired Jack's works for a long time now and was hoping to help defend one of his causes here , exposing the Apollo photography as being faked .

At first I tried to be a peacemaker with those who had been constantly attacking and insulting Jack on the Political Conspiracies forum .... but soon it became very evident to me that no matter how much I asked certain members to be civil towards him , the personal insults still continued ... Then , because of my defense of Jack and also because of my opinions about Apollo , I also became the target of their ad homs .

I don't need to name any names because for anyone who has read this forum , it is very obvious who these members are who constantly use personal attacks instead of meaningful debate about the Apollo subject .... Then unfortunatley , because of the constant name calling directed at me , I also became as abusive and insulting in some of my posts to the members who were now being as insulting to me as they were to Jack .... So in allowing my buttons to be pushed I became as guilty as my attackers with some of my insulting posts ...

The smart thing to do would have been for me to ignore them .. but unfortunatley I chose to lower myself to their level and fought back ... A decision which I now very much regret ...

I am sorry for my contribution in being a problem here and have now decided to completely ignore the members who have been so unkind to both Jack and myself because of our stance on the Apollo Program .

I have much respect for Jack and his ability to not be dragged down to the level of his abusers ... I hope to learn by his example of remaining a gentleman and if allowed to stay on this forum I promise not to engage in any more conduct which is beneath my own previous standards ... Duane

Duane, for what it's worth, I think oftentimes the people who are shining a light where the fascists would rather it remain dark are the very people who are harassed, in the apparent hopes of intimidating and wearing them down. For example, it's precisely because Jack has furthered JFK research that he's targeted by some. They pile on when they sense a threat to the party line.

[Evan Burton]

Duane, for what it's worth, I think oftentimes the people who are shining a light where the fascists would rather it remain dark are the very people who are harassed, in the apparent hopes of intimidating and wearing them down. For example, it's precisely because Jack has furthered JFK research that he's targeted by some. They pile on when they sense a threat to the party line.

While Jack is being mentioned, may I highlight the fact that I do NOT mention Jack's worth as a JFK researcher; I do not have the background to assess his work in that area and thus I confine myself to his 'Apollo Hoax' claims (with the odd foray into the 9/11 world). That is where I am knowledgeable, and that is where I restrict my debate with him to.

[John Simkin]

I have had a lot of complaints recently about the insulting comments of some members of this forum. In virtually every case, the culprits are Americans. I suppose this abusive behaviour must be part of their culture, however, people from outside the United States find it very offensive.

John:

Do you really believe that abusive behaviour is part of American culture?

Steve

It is indeed true that a large percentage of members of this forum are Americans. It is also true that the majority behave in an exemplary way. However, it is true that virtually every complaint I receive is about the behaviour of an American member. I do think it is partly cultural. For example, the films that you make often include people being very aggressive to each other. In fact, it seems as the aggression is part of some sort of formula that the American public like. Of course the “baddies” are portrayed in this way, but so are the “goodies”. Take the example of the crime movie. The detectives attempting to solve the case are invariable unpleasant to each other for most of the time. However, by the end of the film, they are the best of friends, and in many cases, lovers. American movies are not only aggressive and violent, they are also extremely sentimental.

I have visited the United States many times and have not found the American people to be particularly aggressive or violent. They are just as polite and courteous as members of any country I have visited. In fact, on average, I would say they are better behaved that the British.

However, on forums, some Americans behave as if they are in the movies. Therefore, I assume there is something cultural in all this. That it is not a bad thing to be very aggressive. After all, in foreign affairs you seem to take a very similar approach.

[Mark Stapleton]

Perhaps the forum could adopt a stock insult, a particular statement that anyone can make about a fellow member, as long as the person utilizing the insult immediately returns to civility. This would be the only insult allowed on the forum, as long as the insult is used infrequently and with discretion, reserved only for someone who absolutely deserves to be insulted.

Here are two insults, personal favorites of mine, either one of which I think would be a good stock insult for the forum:

"He/she has all the attributes of a dog except loyalty."

"If he/she was any dumber he/she would have to be watered twice a week."

Other forum members may have personal favorites to suggest. Just remember, though, that there is a psychological phenomenon known as spontaneous trait transference. The traits you describe in other people will be applied to you as well, however unconsciously, by the person(s) you're describing them to. You become associated with the characteristics you describe. So beware of this boomerang effect in insulting other people.

That's the best idea I've every heard Ron!

Here's my entry:

"Is that your nose or are you eating a banana?"

Hang on a minute, girly man.

I believe I already made that suggestion way back in post #2. (I like your entry, though)

It's on the record. Read it and weep.

Ron is already showered with adulation. (I think he's a serial glory hogger)

That's "Ms Girly Man" to you... banana nose.

Though I did look back at post #2 and the record supports your assertion that you are due some glory, and perhaps compensation for pain and suffering.

I now foresee a thread discussing how to handle the rash of plagiarism on the ed forum.

Blatant nose-ism.

I'm with Jack.

Disgraceful.

[John Simkin]

Without naming names to throw fuel on the fire it is interesting to note that the two members who most complain about personal attacks are also two of the worst offenders.

On average I receive several complaints a day about the behaviour of members. In most cases, it involves the same people. What tends to happen on threads is that one person makes an unpleasant attack on another. They then retaliate. Both members then PM me and call for the other member to have their post deleted. Occasionally they ask me to delete them as members.

As I said before, these arguments often take place in the JFK photographic threads. Debates on 9/11 and the moon landings also cause a great deal of unpleasantness. It does seem that a group of members try very hard to upset Jack White by making comments about his age and intellect. Understandably, Jack retaliates. As a result, all members involved in this dispute PM me calling for others to be deleted or banned.

We also have another problem. We have some members who appear to be trying to stop others from posting. I have had several emails from people who say they are unwilling to post because they fear ridicule from particular members.

[John Simkin]

John is on the right track in banning forum members who continually show abusive behavior.

Ashton Gray's arrival in the Watergate section, with his instanteous personal attacks on other members, had the effect of ending that particular forum as a source of new information and valuable research concerning this history-changing scandal.

If abusive behavior is the standard by which a member should be banned, Ashton Gray easy meets and exceeds this criterion.

This raises the problem that I face. Doug Caddy and Alfred Baldwin were both answering questions about the Watergate affair. Then Ashton Gray arrived and employed his sarcastic style of questioning people. This resulted in Doug and Alfred withdrawing from the debate we were having. At the time Doug asked me to delete Ashton’s posts concerning his claims that he was a CIA operative. I refused as I saw these as an attack on Ashton’s freedom of speech. However, it did stop Doug and Alfred from posting on the subject. It also damaged my relationship with Doug, something that I very much regret. Ashton is a poster I get a lot of complaints about (he also spends a lot of time sending me emails complaining about members who retaliate).

My fear is that it is the intention of some members to try and stop others from posting. The reason that Andy and I started this forum because we had our postings on another forum deleted. We are both supporters of free expression. It is ironical but probably not surprising, that people are using this freedom to deny it to others.

As I said earlier I do not have the time to monitor this behaviour. I have a business to run. I also have a wife who is extremely ill and needs looking after. I am therefore looking for someone to volunteer to become a “moderator” on this forum. That is to take decisions about deleting these abusive comments and to hand out warnings, etc. The person who volunteers for this task should not me one of those who has been involved in these disputes.

[Guest Stephen Turner]

John, sorry to hear about your partner.

Just a suggestion, but Robert Charles Dunne seems to be a voice that is almost universally respected here. Perhaps he could be persuaded to serve as a moderator. Regards, Steve.

[Len Colby]

When I first joined this forum I was hoping for meaningful and intelligent discussions about my favorite subject , the Apollo moon hoax ... I mainly joined this forum to be supportive of my mentor Jack White .... I have admired Jack's works for a long time now and was hoping to help defend one of his causes here , exposing the Apollo photography as being faked .

At first I tried to be a peacemaker with those who had been constantly attacking and insulting Jack on the Political Conspiracies forum .... but soon it became very evident to me that no matter how much I asked certain members to be civil towards him , the personal insults still continued ... Then , because of my defense of Jack and also because of my opinions about Apollo , I also became the target of their ad homs .

Since you currently are the most abusive member of this forum your complaints ring very hollow.

-I’ve only seen one post on this forum that was edited by a moderator for being too offensive and it was one of yours

- Twice you have accused me of trolling after I asked you politely to back your claims.

- Recently you called a fellow member dog $#!& after he politely pointed out errors in one of your posts.

- You regularly hurl invectives like Nazi and sociopath at your critics and accuse them of lying or acting “stupidly”

[Len Colby]

It does seem that a group of members try very hard to upset Jack White by making comments about his age and intellect. Understandably, Jack retaliates.

As far as I'm aware only one or two members make such comments about Jack (at least about his age), as for unfavorable comments about his intellect it is rather common fare here for members to make such comments about other irrespective of the age or nationality of either party. Jack unfortunately despite his protestations to the contrary Jack often if the one who initiates unpleasant exchanges.

I realize you are in a difficult situation but I doubt any one will volunteer for the thorny and thankless task of moderating uncivil behavior on this forum. I am not familiar enough with Mr. Dunne (we rarely participate in the same threads) but Steve’s recommendation is enough for me but personally I nominate him.

[Steve Ulman]

John – So sorry to hear about your better half – I wish you the best.

Actually, it might explain something to me, I thought I noticed a hint of testiness in your posts lately – Stress induced?

This is an important lesson for all of us – we only know the various members by their posts here (and other places) and do not usually know the details of their lives that make them who they are. Stress of daily life will affect a person in many ways, most of which they are not aware of – I know I’ve gone back and looked at some of my posts and realized that they were harsher than I intended at the time.

This becomes a bigger problem on the Controversial Issues in History forums (esp. JFK and Political Conspiracies) because these are subjects that people are passionate about – on BOTH sides of any issue. Each of us comes here with a lifetime of experiences that controls the way we look at the various issues. I have found that this can, at times, be the source of conflicts between members, even when the parties involved generally agree on other matters.

Bottom line – we all get hot under the collar from time to time – we all need to remember that and not let past transgressions against us interfere with the here and now. When someone wants a serious discussion, discuss, when things get heated – best to walk away for a while.

You know – There’s a reason we were taught (at least I was)- “You never discuss politics or religion in polite society.” That’s because it’s the only way to keep society polite!

FWIW - On banning – What ever makes the forum owners comfortable - A two-step process is probably best – warning then banning, especially for a member that has been here a while. I also think that if a long-term member is banned, the reason for that banning should be easy to find (user’s profile?). This is because the causal member or lurker might get the wrong impression about the member or forum in general when they read the banned members posts that didn’t get them banned. (I hope that makes sense)

Edited February 2, 2007 by Steve Ulman

[John Geraghty]

Misinterpretation-deleted

Edited February 4, 2007 by John Geraghty

[Charles Black]

Hello John

Many years past I had the bad fortune of serving in the miltary during a very unpopular war. But during many occasions I had the "good fortune" of enjoying beers with many men of different nationalities and even professions, as some were newsmen and of other "civilian" occupation. I found none of these mens manners or behavior much differing from the others.

I think that when "men" gather and discuss issues such as war, politics and religion.....there are frequent "flare ups" and arguments, even among those that have been "good friends" for years. There are very demeaning things said (tho soon forgotten) and even personal threats made.

I realize that this forum is not comprised only of men, but men are the ones with whom I have shared such experiences. This can even be seen among well educated "gentlemen" during a contact sports contest......again usually soon forgotten.

I have noticed no particular group when in the company of other internationals, to be more violent and agressive than the others.

What I feel you are experiencing is the typically

somewhat violent, somewhat joking, somewhat sarcastic, somewhat fun loving "natural reactions" of men. Particularly men who have chosen to engage in somewhat competitive and risky environments. A lot of testosterone and many "Type A" personalities. These are types that feel competitiveness necessary in their world to sometimes stay alive...

but ALWAYS to compete. These types generally are capable of being "very close" friends to some, and pretty dangerous enemies to others.

In the circumstances of this forum, you are dealing with one nationality that is more deeply involved personally in these issues than are others. Many have fought in these wars, lost many friends, and suffered as a result, broken marriages and families.... and who have by necessity become "accustomed" (if that is possible) to violence, and to what they consider betrayal.

Perhaps I have unknowingly associated with a group of international thugs....but I don't think so.

Or it is possible that I have been exposed to more than the average number of very competitive men.

This will probably shock you, but what I have found most amazing regarding your statements, is that you have many male members asking "you to intervene" on their behalf. I have, for some reason, not known many of this type. Perhaps I have just been lucky !

Charlie Black

[John Geraghty]

John,

I may not be your first choice, but if I can help out in any way I would be most obliged. I am a student and have a good deal of free time on my hands. I realise that my youth may be an issue. If you are stuck for someone to help out, even in a minor role, I am certainly available.

If you wish to contact me, you can do so via johnpetergeraghty@gmail.com. Alternatively, we can discuss it over the phone.

All the best,

John