The banning of SciFi Chick had to be the most unjustified thing I have ever seen from you BA. If defending oneself, and doing it with a restraint I can only hope to learn someday, is grounds for a banning you might as well take a gander in P.R.'s stupid dino thread because I put her to shame last night. The thing is, sometimes someone has to stick up for one's self instead of eating crow. In SciFi Chick's case she did it without resorting to insults and, if sarcasm is a sin here, you might as well ban 80% of the board. Not everyone will walk 5 miles out of their way to avoid defending themselves like you do (think Hoagland - you attack him but then duck and cover when he calls you on it). If you can live with yourself, that's fine and dandy. To demand others to march to that tune just to have the privilege to post here is too much .. for me anyway.

This is unacceptable. Whether you ban me or not, I'm done here.

I don't want to be BANNED, but its so unfair....

Please don't ban me... I'm just upset...

__________________
If this writing is blue you're going too fast!

Well it does seem like she had quit the argument. Oh well, not my board.

__________________
You're a coward and a liar and a thOOF - Bart Sibrel

I join with the others in stating that I feel the banning of SciFiChick was unjustified. I know it's your board Dr BA, but I think you made a bad decision this time.

__________________
Free speech is no problem
It's listening that costs

Do Unban SciFi!

__________________
Fiorello: What am I supposed to say?
Otis B. Driftwood: Tell them you're not here.
Fiorello: I don't think they'll believe me.
Otis B. Driftwood: Start talking. They'll believe you.
A Night at the Opera (1935)

I feel that it would be hypocritical of me not to publicly voice my defense of SciFi Chick given that I have mentioned it privately and on FWIS. For a poster such as Jpax to be allowed to engage in his tactics for as long as he has and eventually cause his own banning as well as one of the boards best posters is a statement that something is wrong here. I absolutely love posting here, and have for some time now as many others have, and as a growing number come to find each day. We have 5643 posters and 433550 posts as of now, and these numbers are growing faster all the time. Of course things will go unchecked, but for awhile now this tension has been building and, as many of us have already attested, Jpax has come across as rude and manipulative, especially towards SciFi Chick. I believe that SciFi Chick had a right and a need to defend herself against him, and while she may not have done it in the best manner (though certainly better than the majority of us if faced with the same situation), her actions should not have provoked a banning. I only hope that this situation is fixed, and something similar is not allowed to happen in the future.

i second that. =D>

__________________
Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes? -- Groucho Marx

I'll admit that I'm torn. I can see both sides of the argument. SciFiChick was an exemplary poster, and I'm very sad to see this happen. But the BA does have rules about politeness, despite past behaviour.

I really don't know what to think.

__________________
Quaeso quousque humi defixa tua mens erit? Nonne aspicis, quae in templa veneris?

Sure you do.

I agree with Archer and the others in this thread.

__________________
Hwæt! We Gardena in geardagum,
þeodcyninga, þrym gefrunon,
hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon.

Gut feeling, yes, I do agree.

But the rules are pretty specific. Hence my dilemma.

__________________
Quaeso quousque humi defixa tua mens erit? Nonne aspicis, quae in templa veneris?

Yes, the rules are specific. But in that case Jpax should have been gone long ago.

Boy, go away for just a little while and all hell breaks loose. Based on the evidence I must agree with the majority here.

__________________
Earth First! We'll mine the rest later.

I agree that niceness is in the rules, but you're not breaking them by defending yourself. At least that's how I see it.
I think what worries me the most about this situation is how I've seen so many other posters get by for saying much worse. Now I'm not saying this is a justification for the numbers thread but instead I worry because it shows a lack of consistancy in how the board is run. And when people aren't sure just how to act and how and when the rules are going to be enforced the board does not run smoothly and it suffers as a whole.
I'm sure I speak for all of us when I state that I believe the BABB to be one of the best places to hang out on the Internet and I have nothing but great hopes that it will continue to be that way. I just want to state that recent events have made me worried about the state of the board, and I have nothing but great wishes that they'll be resolved soon.

__________________
Yes, I have a life. It's quite different from yours.

I won't disagree with that. But they apply to everyone.


I hate this.

__________________
Quaeso quousque humi defixa tua mens erit? Nonne aspicis, quae in templa veneris?

I have mostly been lurking lately but I had to pop and say something about this. This has got to be one of the best examples of someone starting something and the person who stands up to it gets punished too. I remember these situations in school. Johnny pokes Sally...Sally sasys stop. Teacher punishes both Johnny and Sally. Didn't like it much then don't like it much now. Never let it be said that no good deed goes unpunished.

Peace Folks. Looks like I will be out for a long time. These boots are made for walking...............

(not a Nancy Sinatra fan)

__________________
Light is faster than sound. "That's why some people appear bright until they speak"

WWGD (What Would GLP Do)

Inspected by #13

I tried to make myself clear in my post where I locked that thread. If someone is posting in an immature manner, then that is one thing. But SciFi Chick started the flaming. She could have ignored Jpax, or PMed me that he was being obnoxious, or gently pointed out that what he was doing was wrong. Instead, she posted in a (marginally) rude manner, and then let herself get sucked into an argument which got much worse. The two of them have had many scraps on this board, and this one went too far.

I have no problem with people defending themselves. Despite your claim, Archer, I have done it in the past and I will no doubt need to again in the future. But I will do it politely. That's the key difference.

And it's not like I'm sitting here clapping my hands in glee. I'm pretty upset about this too.

As far as a Hoagland goes, that is a far different situation. I know what he is like in a "debate". I made myself clear in the "Debating Pseudoscientists" page.

__________________
Phil Plait
The Bad Astronomer
http://www.badastronomy.com
badastro@badastronomy.com

As I suggested over here, I do not agree that the rules are specific. I would say that the rule "be polite" is about as vague as a rule can be. Vague rules are not a problem as long as they are enforced very consistently, and I have not been here long enough to be able to judge whether the enforcement is consistent. But I will say that this incident has cast doubt on my previous notion of what the standards were.

(I did not want to post in this thread at first, because the OP verges on a personal attack, and I did not want to appear to support that. But since this is where the discussion seems to be, I decided to add my comments.)

I'll add my post in agreement. Sorry BA, I have never questioned a banning by you until now. Not that my opionion matters, but I don't think the banning of SciFi Chick was justified. 8-[

__________________
Homer no function beer well without – Homer Simpson

BA, while I agree with most of the decisions you have made, this one I don't. It's mainly because I've watched JPAX do things deliberately in the past and get away with it when I felt he shouldn't have going by the rules you posted on your own board.

Yes SciFi did defend herself but she did so far better than I could have. I had a run in with JPAX a while ago too. In that thread he accused me of American bashing when I said no such thing as well as that I was talking out my rear and that I was ignorant. I pretty much stopped posting because of this person. I'm not one to whine but I brought that up only to give you an example of the way he pushed people from posting on your site.

This is a clear case of too little too late. I know it must be difficult for you to follow every thread and you rely on people to inform you when they see something wrong on your site. Well, this is it. People are informing you that you may have in-advertently made a bad call here. I just hope you are willing to listen.

__________________
MrObvious

I'm sorry sir, but I cannot agree. First of all, I don't believe that any flaming actually occured, and even if that's the label for it, then SciFi Chick certainly did not start it. I do agree with you that other actions could have been taken instead of what occured, but to fault her for all the occasions where Jpax has been rude or completely out of line is just too much in my opinion. To think that nearly everyone who was reading that thread had the same reaction when reading Jpax's posts and not SciFi's has to mean something.

I am going to do some research into thi