Bernd Schneider finally answers my E-mail

[Kazuaki Shimazaki]

I believe whatever they put in their text is what they really think.

Just that in what seems to be the majority opinion on this board, what Bertrand (which is apparently typical) wrote is not an apology. To tell you why, consider this made-up apology:

I'm really sorry, XXX, for kicking the shit out of you on Tuesday. I know I'm superior to you on just about everything and that you are a mindless, idiotic, moronic [insert insults here] wimp that richly deserves everything nasty you get. But I apologize for beating you up anyway.

Technically, there is a "sorry." I guess it could be considered an apology, but I don't think I'll quite accept this.

[Colonel Olrik]

And about any religion debates, there are atheists and agnostics at SCN. Quite a few actually. We disagree on alot of things, but that does not make us hate each other. The reasons that these look like they do is because we keep our internal debates civil and we do our best not to insult our peers.

Please, post a link to a debate which passed from page two or three where some fucking points are made without anyone intervening to say " that's a matter of personal faith, not science"

[Warspite]

Yeah, that's something which escaped his attention. I've had flamewars with many members of the board who are still here. Two of them are even moderators! But on his board, there is astounding uniformity of opinion.

Even on unrelated matters, you see this uniformity. In a thread dealing with religion, they all spout in unison that atheism is unscientific. Not ONE VOICE is raised in dissent to this tragically ignorant and mindlessly unscientific argument. Of course not; they're all one big happy family! We would hate to have anything as destructive as, oh, say, debate, wouldn't we?

Quite right, but that's the whole focus point, isn't it?
By their view, a board is where people share the same view, and the "view" is imposed by the board creator. Having dissent is not belonging to the family, therefore not being one of "them".
A similar analogy would be a fraternity (and it's rituals). If one of the freshman (or woman) does not abide to the fraternity rules, he becomes an outcast. Other fraternities are the enemy, and a target.
They being more... radical about this whole story is quite sad, unlike us and SB.

[Nathan F]

And about any religion debates, there are atheists and agnostics at SCN. Quite a few actually. We disagree on alot of things, but that does not make us hate each other. The reasons that these look like they do is because we keep our internal debates civil and we do our best not to insult our peers.

Please, post a link to a debate which passed from page two or three where some fucking points are made without anyone intervening to say " that's a matter of personal faith, not science"

So what if someone says that? That is their personal opinion, not the opinion of the entire board. We dont all jump up in unison. As previously stated, we disagree on alot of things.

[Nathan F]

Yeah, that's something which escaped his attention. I've had flamewars with many members of the board who are still here. Two of them are even moderators! But on his board, there is astounding uniformity of opinion.

Even on unrelated matters, you see this uniformity. In a thread dealing with religion, they all spout in unison that atheism is unscientific. Not ONE VOICE is raised in dissent to this tragically ignorant and mindlessly unscientific argument. Of course not; they're all one big happy family! We would hate to have anything as destructive as, oh, say, debate, wouldn't we?

Quite right, but that's the whole focus point, isn't it?
By their view, a board is where people share the same view, and the "view" is imposed by the board creator. Having dissent is not belonging to the family, therefore not being one of "them".
A similar analogy would be a fraternity (and it's rituals). If one of the freshman (or woman) does not abide to the fraternity rules, he becomes an outcast. Other fraternities are the enemy, and a target.
They being more... radical about this whole story is quite sad, unlike us and SB.

So now our view is all imposed by Bernd and MinutiaeMan...

Not quite. In fact, it is nothing like that. We might mutually agree on some things, but no one's view is imposed on them, it is a free board. We have rules, and yes, if someone knowingly breaks those rules, then they risk the consequences. But the rules are there for mutual benefit and to help maintain a semblance of order. If there is dissent, then, well, there is. You don't become an outcast for disagreeing with a moderator, administrator, or othe rmember.

[Colonel Olrik]

So what if someone says that? That is their personal opinion, not the opinion of the entire board. We dont all jump up in unison. As previously stated, we disagree on alot of things.

There is NO discussion on your forum. None whatsoever, as far as science is concerned. The DOMINANT idea is precisely to avoid any controversial theme. Now, I always thought that controversial themes are the ones worthy of discussion, the blood of any forum. Of course, having opinions may give way to a discussion. My God, the horror!!

[Colonel Olrik]

So now our view is all imposed by Bernd and MinutiaeMan...

Not quite. In fact, it is nothing like that. We might mutually agree on some things, but no one's view is imposed on them, it is a free board. We have rules, and yes, if someone knowingly breaks those rules, then they risk the consequences. But the rules are there for mutual benefit and to help maintain a semblance of order. If there is dissent, then, well, there is. You don't become an outcast for disagreeing with a moderator, administrator, or othe rmember.

Point to me a thread in which even a semblant of serious discussion was not quickly put to an end. The forum is a dead zone, compared to SD.net.

Don't you think there's a reason why this forum atracts much more quality debaters than yours? How many engineers/students of science are regular there?

[Warspite]

So now our view is all imposed by Bernd and MinutiaeMan...

Not quite. In fact, it is nothing like that. We might mutually agree on some things, but no one's view is imposed on them, it is a free board. We have rules, and yes, if someone knowingly breaks those rules, then they risk the consequences. But the rules are there for mutual benefit and to help maintain a semblance of order. If there is dissent, then, well, there is. You don't become an outcast for disagreeing with a moderator, administrator, or othe rmember.

Fine, I'm sorry for what I wrote, but... (Hummm, where I heard this before?)

There's no imposition, fine, how about a gentleman's deal, then? You people claim we are single-minded activists. It takes one to know one, I'll say, besides, people aren't dumb, have you realised that not only us, but uncounted guests have been reading our little "feud"? If we see through your screen of civility, surely other people can.
To conclude: stop going around in circles and step down from your moral high-ground, it's of no use when you're being called upon.

[Nathan F]

So what if someone says that? That is their personal opinion, not the opinion of the entire board. We dont all jump up in unison. As previously stated, we disagree on alot of things.

There is NO discussion on your forum. None whatsoever, as far as science is concerned. The DOMINANT idea is precisely to avoid any controversial theme. Now, I always thought that controversial themes are the ones worthy of discussion, the blood of any forum. Of course, having opinions may give way to a discussion. My God, the horror!!

Again, I respectfully disagree. We have had some controversial discussions..

First off, we had a VERY heated debate over the naming of a fan-fic ship a member made:
http://scn.infopop.net/0/OpenTopic?a=tp ... 2700976345
BTW, the reason that one was shut down was because it was an old thread that someone had dug up. It had simply lived out its usable life.

Not alot of discussion on this one, but the poll definitely showed some different views:
http://scn.infopop.net/0/OpenTopic?a=tp ... 8350985545

Heres a debate we had over the morality of cloning and what to do with a clone:
http://scn.infopop.net/0/OpenTopic?a=tp ... 8190953345

Here is a religious debate that shows how much we can disagree at times:
http://scn.infopop.net/0/OpenTopic?a=tp ... 6160917045
BTW, the reason it was closed was not because of the specific request, but because it was degrading into a flame war. There were a couple there that couldn't accept that others believe different things, and they just wouldnt let it alone.

[Colonel Olrik]

If that's the better you could find.. Thanks for proving my point.

Again, I respectfully disagree. We have had some controversial discussions..

First off, we had a VERY heated debate over the naming of a fan-fic ship a member made:
http://scn.infopop.net/0/OpenTopic?a=tp ... 2700976345
BTW, the reason that one was shut down was because it was an old thread that someone had dug up. It had simply lived out its usable life.

Irrelevant. I don't call a disagreement over ship's name a serious discussion. Anyway, it didn't pass page one.

Not alot of discussion on this one, but the poll definitely showed some different views:
http://scn.infopop.net/0/OpenTopic?a=tp ... 8350985545

Two replies! Different opinions in the poll and yet not a shadow of discussion. This is too easy.

Heres a debate we had over the morality of cloning and what to do with a clone:
http://scn.infopop.net/0/OpenTopic?a=tp ... 8190953345

Wow! Two almost full pages. I'm impressed. Hardly no replies. No debate.

Here is a religious debate that shows how much we can disagree at times:
http://scn.infopop.net/0/OpenTopic?a=tp ... 6160917045
BTW, the reason it was closed was not because of the specific request, but because it was degrading into a flame war. There were a couple there that couldn't accept that others believe different things, and they just wouldnt let it alone.

One page, this astounding argument

If I were an Administrator, I'd lock this topic down right now just to keep from hearing your total lies. I'm leaving. FELIS! Lock 'er Down.

And a lock. I'm so impressed.

You actually helped my point. Thanks!


foo

[Warspite]

I'm only going for this one:

Here is a religious debate that shows how much we can disagree at times:
http://scn.infopop.net/0/OpenTopic?a=tp ... 6160917045
BTW, the reason it was closed was not because of the specific request, but because it was degrading into a flame war. There were a couple there that couldn't accept that others believe different things, and they just wouldnt let it alone.

Strange, here are the final two posts:

Shadow Saber
Senior Member
posted December 04, 2002 03:21
If I were an Administrator, I'd lock this topic down right now just to keep from hearing your total lies. I'm leaving. FELIS! Lock 'er Down.

___________________________________________________
"Doctor, if I were able to show emotion, your new infatuation with that term would begin to annoy me." -Spock
"What term? "Logic"? Medical men are trained in logic, Mr. Spock." -McCoy
"Really, Doctor? I had no idea they were trained. Watching you, I assumed it was all trial and error." -Spock


www.anglefire.com/droid/ussregional
Posts: 235 | From: Starfleet | Registered: November 12, 2002



Felis Demens CCXXI
Moderator
posted December 04, 2002 03:22
Gladly.

*exsasperated sigh*

I never saw any flames in that discussion, then again, I'm probably spoiled by SD.Net Flames (TM).
The debate was going along very nicely, and suddendly it get's shut down? Just because one of the debaters is not liking it?

Hummmmm.... Yes, there are different opinions, but being squelched on very shacky grounds... (where did I see THAT happening?)

[Nathan F]

If you had read the first one, you would have found that it started out as a ships name thread, then moved to a thread concerning racial discrimination. And it got VERY heated.

I put the second up for an example of how we disagree on topics, yet we refrain from groping for each others necks.

Where do you get the idea that there was no debate of the cloning? I am still trying to figure out where you got that.

So what if it was one page? We don't post 3 or four postings to say what could be said in one, unlike it is done on SDnet. On SCN, there is no incentive for post number, so we don't do that.

And about that last one. What did I tell you? The reason it was locked down was because it had degraded into a flame war, not because it was that guys request.

Now, please read everything I say instead of selectively taking what you wish and using that to further your argument.

[Nathan F]

Felis later stated that it was not locked down on that guys request. I believe it was either in a PM session or on the Moderator Forum.

[Colonel Olrik]

Oh, and this was unchallenged, and pratically terminated that one page "debate"

Hiya, I am Kentar's parent. I just could not help myself, hope yall don't mind my two-cents' worth.
Anyway, I am, too, a teacher and understand your dilemma. You want to teach what is true, but do not want to crush a creative spirit. My applause to you!
Ask yourself this...how *exactly* do you "know" that the Bible was not written by God? You were not there, of course, and the "experts" who say that they have this proof and that fact were not there either, and their "facts" have been questioned and disproven many a time, (Think...the world is NOT flat, we are NOT the center of the universe, etc.). I understand others may believe differently, but in reality the Bible does not contradict itself, and has never been proven to be incorrect. I say this not to question your beliefs, but to point out that holding a true Christian-world-view is not only a very scientifically-plausible reality, but also this is someone's genuine belief and faith. Many things we take for granted as true fact are really just beliefs, perhaps with very good supporting evidence, but belief just the same, (the man who asserted that germs existed and made people ill was completely ridiculed and dismissed as a lunatic who imagined little green men, but he held to his genuine belief, and was later proven correct! Imagine if his teacher had flunked him, not for his poor grammar or choppy writing, but for his belief!).
You can't give this child a poor grade because you do not share his beliefs. I am a Christian, given over completely to the awesome power of God. Yet, if I received an English paper from a student who extolled the glory of ____, I would have to evaluate that paper on it's academic merits. Especially since you, the teacher, are the one who picked the subject. If you were to grade this child on his belief / opinion, I would go so far as to suggest that you would be guilty of a "bait-and-hook", asking the class to express their beliefs, and then punishing them academically for being real and honest. Actually, for every child that wrote from the heart on this assignment, (regardless of their belief), I say they should get extra credit for being strong enough and passionate enough to expose their heart!! Bravo for them!!

HoneyBee

Here, I or other would challenge him to a debate. This incredible statements would not gently pass as wisdom and truth.

[Grand Admiral Thrawn]

Well you know, Mike, I'm not saying you're a bad person. Hell, some of my best friends are orcs! Let's let this die. I live my life without belittling others who are wrong, you know. I won't say anything bad about your website full of fallacious subjective poop, and you won't cuss at me, ok? Can we be civil about this. I mean, I know I can..."

Asshole. Simply saying something is fallacious is...*GASP*! A fallacy!

[Nathan F]

What was there to debate? She said that she would personally give the kid a passing grade. She didn't say anything TOO debate. She had her own views, and we accept that. Even per chance that I did disagree with her, would she ever even see it? And even if she did, would it do any good? You see, at SCN, the majority of us try to accept the fact that others have different views. In fact, if I am not mistaken, the guy whos mother posted that had been told multiple times that other people have different views. There are times when it is good to debate, and there are other times when it is best just to quit. This was a time to quit.

[Colonel Olrik]

If you had read the first one, you would have found that it started out as a ships name thread, then moved to a thread concerning racial discrimination. And it got VERY heated.

Look, this has lived beyond its useable life. I am hereby shutting it down to keep up from digging out old skeletons in the closet, so to speak. This thread started out as divisive subject, and I am afraid it will not change.

Besides the fact that you indeed prevent threads from becoming sensitive, I can't really see a debate there. You know, two persons disagreeing, making arguments and counterarguments, eventually reaching some conclusion? Wait a minute, more or less what's happening here!

I put the second up for an example of how we disagree on topics, yet we refrain from groping for each others necks.

Yes, agree to disagree. Makes discussion so fertile. Wait, not even discussion. People voted in different opinions, but no discussion ensued. Being a student of engineering, you should know that not all opinions are equally valid, and that the scientific method is a means of reaching valid conclusions. A pity you don't apply it more over there.

Where do you get the idea that there was no debate of the cloning? I am still trying to figure out where you got that.

To have a debate usually implies two or more people with different opinions trying to convince the other of the superior validity of their own views.

So what if it was one page? We don't post 3 or four postings to say what could be said in one, unlike it is done on SDnet. On SCN, there is no incentive for post number, so we don't do that.

That's the funniest thing I've heard in a while. I don't give a damn about my PC. I doubt if Mike does, or most of the others. We actually stand up for our opinions, and are allowed to.

And about that last one. What did I tell you? The reason it was locked down was because it had degraded into a flame war, not because it was that guys request.

No reason to let ludicrous statements pass as gentle truths.

[Colonel Olrik]

What was there to debate? She said that she would personally give the kid a passing grade. She didn't say anything TOO debate. She had her own views, and we accept that. Even per chance that I did disagree with her, would she ever even see it? And even if she did, would it do any good? You see, at SCN, the majority of us try to accept the fact that others have different views.

WTF is there to debate then, the weather?? Different opinions ARE NOT equally valid. That is a reason to debate them. Are you also against educating the ignorant, and personal progression? There are people around there with creationist ideas simple because they were never faced with the facts. Morals are not relative. Is it so hard a concept to grasp?

[Robert Treder]

What was there to debate? She said that she would personally give the kid a passing grade. She didn't say anything TOO debate. She had her own views, and we accept that. Even per chance that I did disagree with her, would she ever even see it? And even if she did, would it do any good? You see, at SCN, the majority of us try to accept the fact that others have different views. In fact, if I am not mistaken, the guy whos mother posted that had been told multiple times that other people have different views. There are times when it is good to debate, and there are other times when it is best just to quit. This was a time to quit.

What the fucking shit? So just when is it a good time to debate? When everyone is in agreement? Sounds a lot like intellectual masturbation to me.
Don't you understand that the central idea behind debating is that two or more sides that DISAGREE on a topic discuss that topic, each trying to support their own views with evidence in a logical manner? This guy's mom's post sounds like a perfect candidate for debate. If, as you claim, members disagree about the content of said post, then why the fuck wouldn't you debate it? If the topic is taboo for debate or something, then why was it brought up in the first place?

By the way, if you're so adamant about how everybody has a right to their opinions and nobody should attack anybody else for their opinions, then why the hell are you so desperately defending your webboard's honor? Isn't it our opinion that you guys are a bunch of dumbasses? Shouldn't you respect that opinion and not do anything about it? Or am I missing something?

[Master of Ossus]

Have you ever stopped to think that the apologies might NOT be BS? They weren't. They were sincere. We have discussed this on SCN, and yes, everything said on this board is sincere. Bernd's email was an attempt to make amends with you, and you rejected it. Just say you reject his apology and be done with it, and please stop using YOUR postings to keep hurling insults at us! We have completely stopped discussion concerning Stardestroyer.net at SCN in the hopes that you would see that we are sincere about putting an end to the insults.

That's bullshit, NF_Utvol, and you know it. You are deliberately distorting what was posted here in order to screen Doctor Schneider from criticism. Anyone can read his e-mail, and he was clearly copping out while simultaneously throwing more insults. Now he MIGHT have been sincere about his apology, if not for his failure to cease his atrocious behavior, even after it is pointed out to him, Doctor Schneider is clearly in the wrong and his apology counts for nothing. He is as deceitful as the Indiana Jones character who shares his title and last name.

[Darth Wong]

Have you ever stopped to think that the apologies might NOT be BS? They weren't. They were sincere. We have discussed this on SCN, and yes, everything said on this board is sincere.

Yes, your apologies were sincerely laced with put-downs and insults.

Bernd's email was an attempt to make amends with you, and you rejected it.

Bullshit. Bernd's E-mail was 3/4 insults and put-downs. What the fuck kind of apology spends most of its volume insulting the other person?

Just say you reject his apology and be done with it, and please stop using YOUR postings to keep hurling insults at us!

*sound of violins playing*

Listen up, chickenshit. You insult us with every goddamned thing you say, and you have the fucking NERVE to get uppity? His "apology" was yet another mindless string of insults, and HE has the fucking NERVE to play the wounded innocent? Cry me a fucking river, asshole. We've had enough of your bullshit.

We have completely stopped discussion concerning Stardestroyer.net at SCN in the hopes that you would see that we are sincere about putting an end to the insults.

Bernd's E-mail was almost entirely composed of insults. Don't fucking lie to me.

[Warspite]

What was there to debate? She said that she would personally give the kid a passing grade. She didn't say anything TOO debate. She had her own views, and we accept that. Even per chance that I did disagree with her, would she ever even see it? And even if she did, would it do any good? You see, at SCN, the majority of us try to accept the fact that others have different views. In fact, if I am not mistaken, the guy whos mother posted that had been told multiple times that other people have different views. There are times when it is good to debate, and there are other times when it is best just to quit. This was a time to quit.

Can't you see? There was a debate going on, people were expressing their views and trying to make other people understand their views. Last time I checked this is good, it allows to grow and possibly the other person(s) were debating. I've been handed my ass on a plater, and I didn't mind, it's part of the whole deal.
Agreeing on each other views and carrying on as nothing is an exact oposite, it's deconstructive, it achieves nothing for our own selves.
You, who claim the moral-high ground by not engaging in ego-trips should understand this... But, who is taking that ego cruise? I don't see here nobody claiming we're better than you.

Adding to Col. Olrik statement about post count, we police ourselves for post-counting rashes and multi-posts, the people on this board have a clear mind about the brilliant usefullness of post counting, even comemorating posts don't last too long.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

Oh, it's just a joke, eh? OK, Schneider is a fucking asshole and a coward

Note how I put a smiley at the end. This makes it a harmless joke.

Lol FUQ (or is that only for things said on ASVS?)!

[Darth Wong]

There are several things that the EAS people don't seem to understand:

• So-called "swear words" and intelligent discourse are not necessarily exclusive. See "style over substance" fallacy.
• Telling someone he's stupid and dishonest is every bit as much of an insult as "asshole", and when someone says the former, he has no right to act shocked when the latter is thrown back at him.
• Real debate requires the willingness to flatly say "you're wrong" and try to back it up. The rest of them complain that we should never say that any opinion, no matter how stupid and ignorant, is ever wrong. They even agree that it's OK to give a student a passing grade for saying something that is completely, objectively, dumb-assed wrong ... as long as he sincerely believes in it Of course, this rule mysteriously vanishes when it comes to our board, where Bernd is suddenly allowed to flatly say "you're wrong" ... and then refuse to back it up.
• You do not insult someone during an apology if you want anyone to take it seriously.

Are these people deliberately trying to be pricks, or do they sincerely think that we will accept their bullshit? First they come at this with this moronic notion that it's "close-minded" to say that anyone's opinion is wrong or ignorant or fallacious ... except when they're saying it about us . Then, they pretend to apologize while simultaneously hurling more insults. Finally, they scream that we're about to conduct heinous actions such as a board invasion ... which they secretly tried on us many months ago! Who the fuck do these little shits think they are?

[Master of Ossus]

And about any religion debates, there are atheists and agnostics at SCN. Quite a few actually. We disagree on alot of things, but that does not make us hate each other. The reasons that these look like they do is because we keep our internal debates civil and we do our best not to insult our peers.

Please, post a link to a debate which passed from page two or three where some fucking points are made without anyone intervening to say " that's a matter of personal faith, not science"

So what if someone says that? That is their personal opinion, not the opinion of the entire board. We dont all jump up in unison. As previously stated, we disagree on alot of things.

But you didn't disagree on this topic. You treat an opinion as if it is sacred, even if it is objectively wrong. You know better, NF, and I have little sympathy for people who refuse to state what they actually mean.