Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Mugailiens handing out infractions for using the word ignorant.

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,951

    Default Mugailiens handing out infractions for using the word ignorant.

    Gave me 3 warnings and an infraction in PM for "calling" someone ignorant.

    Why does a mod on a science board give such an advantage to the ignorant?

    So the ignorant, unprincipled and unreliable have a mod on their side.

    In PM he called me "going ballistic" for rejecting his unprincipled infraction. "It's only one" he says.

    Until he publicly retracts that infraction and the warnings he will eternally have my public distain.

    When it comes to ignorance there is no differance between "your post is ignorant" and "you are ignorant." In fact "your post is ignorant" is an ignorant thing to say. Only people can be ignorant. A post can't be any more ignorant than a brick.

    How about that? Your post is as ignorant as a brick. See attacking the post not the poster.

    Oh I like that

    Mugailiens your infraction is as ignorant as a big dumb stupid jackass of a brick.

    Ooooh I like this semantic game. Kind of like voodoo.

    Moderator Comment: See you in a week...

    - Mugs
    Last edited by mugaliens; 07-11-2012 at 12:06 AM.
    Lies have the stench of death and defeat.

  2. #2
    Senior Member Bananas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    378

    Default Re: Mugailiens handing out infractions for using the word ignorant.

    Did the offence get edited out of some post?

    I'm assuming the infraction comes from: Member rules

    3. Community Rules: We are a community of adults. Minimum age to join these forums is eighteen, but they're read by people of all ages, so watch your language. One account per person -- do not use anyone else's account nor allow anyone else to use your account. Treat others with dignity and respect, whether you feel they deserve it or not. Attack the post, not the person -- personal attacks of any kind will not be tolerated. Learn and use the Taxonomy of Logical Fallacies. As this is a science forum, keep discussions on religion and politics in the background, and keep it respectful i.e. no racism, sexism, or religion-ism. If your pet theory goes against the mainstream, post it in that section. Respect the privacy of others do not share PM's and e-mails on the forum. If someone breaks these rules, report their post using the post report function. Feel free to edit your posts for spelling and grammar, but once you've posted, do not go back and delete your posts. For significant content changes, simply create a new post.
    Seems to me, that regardless of how one tries to justify it, calling someone "ignorant" can easily fail that rule.

    (For example, a person may be "overweight" so it's "factual" to call that person "fat". However, depending on context and tone, that's easily taken (or given) as an insult.)

    Seems a fair infraction (though with the disclaimer I've not seen the actual post). People don't get banned 'round here often.
    = ?

  3. #3
    Senior Member mugaliens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    1,333

    Default Re: Mugailiens handing out infractions for using the word ignorant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bananas View Post
    Did the offence get edited out of some post?
    Nope. As below, but that's just the capstone on a string of personal attacks to forum members and a mod.

    I'm assuming the infraction comes from: Member rules
    Yep.

    Seems to me, that regardless of how one tries to justify it, calling someone "ignorant" can easily fail that rule.
    While it falls afoul the of the rule, it's hardly grounds for a suspension, much less a ban. Astrotech was suspended for continuing and even increasing his attacks on others after being warned.

    Seems a fair infraction (though with the disclaimer I've not seen the actual post).
    It says "banned," but Astrotech is merely suspended for a week. Let's hope he cools off - he's normally a welcome presence here on the forum.

    People don't get banned 'round here often.
    Only one so far, and unlike BAUT, we don't ban people for having differing opinions. In fact, we welcome them.

    The bar for a perma-ban is pretty high -- they have to really want to get banned. It takes a LOT of work!
    My oath of office never expires. "God, who gave us life, gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?" - Thomas Jefferson. "I have far too long suffered fools. No longer will I tolerate the insufferable. Enjoy the vacuum." - Mugs

    PS: I scrambled my password, so no, I will not be responding. Get a clue.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Bananas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    378

    Default Re: Mugailiens handing out infractions for using the word ignorant.

    Ah... not uncommon for someone complaining about their treatment to misrepresent the reason why they were treated the way they were.
    = ?

  5. #5
    Senior Member mugaliens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    1,333

    Default Re: Mugailiens handing out infractions for using the word ignorant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bananas View Post
    Ah... not uncommon for someone complaining about their treatment to misrepresent the reason why they were treated the way they were.
    Post on, Bananas. If your content is sound, it'll stand on it's own merit. Perhaps you can be somewhat less cryptic?
    My oath of office never expires. "God, who gave us life, gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?" - Thomas Jefferson. "I have far too long suffered fools. No longer will I tolerate the insufferable. Enjoy the vacuum." - Mugs

    PS: I scrambled my password, so no, I will not be responding. Get a clue.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Bananas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    378

    Default Re: Mugailiens handing out infractions for using the word ignorant.

    What's cryptic?

    astrotech posted information in post #1 of this thread.
    I commented.
    You clarified a bit.
    My next comment was about your clarification showing that he misrepresented the situation a bit in post #1.


    (
    Is he posting elsewhere that anyone knows? I'm curious whether his posting style is being put up with by other forums.
    )
    = ?

  7. #7
    Senior Member Coelacanth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    602

    Default Re: Mugailiens handing out infractions for using the word ignorant.

    Should have called them "idiots" instead of "ignorant". Judging by mugaliens' recent behaviour, that's perfectly acceptable.
    Last edited by mugaliens; 09-28-2012 at 07:12 PM.

  8. #8
    Moderator Neverfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Utopia Planetia, Mars
    Posts
    1,782

    Default Re: Mugailiens handing out infractions for using the word ignorant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coelacanth View Post
    Should have called them "idiots" instead of "ignorant". Judging by mugaliens' recent behaviour, that's perfectly acceptable.
    It's ok, but if you call him out on it for it- He'll lock the thread.

    Moderator Note: Nope. But since you insist on arguing with a mod in-thread despite receiving a warning reminding you of the rules which clearly state that is a no-no, you've begun accumulating infractions.

    Good luck with that...
    Last edited by mugaliens; 09-28-2012 at 07:18 PM.

  9. #9
    Senior Member mugaliens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    1,333

    Default Re: Mugailiens handing out infractions for using the word ignorant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coelacanth View Post
    Should have called them "idiots" instead of "ignorant". Judging by mugaliens' recent behaviour, that's perfectly acceptable.


    Collectively, yes. We've all encountered situations where two heads are better than one, and where a group of individuals can better discern a course of action than and individual, or even a smaller group.

    We've also encountered "group-think," whereby one or more members of the group leads it down the primrose path to disarray and destruction, all while being in agreement, more or less. The failure of NASA's administration to properly address the o-ring problems that lead to the Challenger disaster come to mind. Specifically, "It later emerged in the aftermath of the accident that NASA managers frequently evaded safety regulations to maintain the launch manifest." This is consistent with Sally Ride's citing before the Roger's Commission: "It is forbidden to rely on a backup for a "Criticality 1" component. The backup is there to provide redundancy in case of unforeseen failure, not to replace the primary device, leaving no backup."

    In retrospect, they weren't actually idiots. They were, however, collectively ignorant of group dynamics, as evidenced by both senior Thiokol engineers and NASA officials allowing events and other people to pressure them into violating policies and directives, and make bad decisions. It was, pun intended, a recipe for disaster.

    No multi-billion dollar system is at stake here. That doesn't mean mistakes aren't made, that group-think isn't at work hurting the situation, or that the proper application of group dynamics can't help the decisions being made. All are true, all the time, any time two or more people get together and make a decision. The key is to minimize the mistakes, minimize group-think, and apply appropriate group dynamics.

    Let's take a look at each of these:

    1. Minimize mistakes: Key to this is knowing and following the rules. This applies to users, to be sure, but it applies to mods and admins even more so, if they have any desire to run a healthy forum. Secondary to this is adopting a dispassionate, objective frame of mind, without which one will be incapable of applying the rules.

    2. Minimize group-think: Accomplishing this requires a lot of personal integrity along with some personal fortitude. You have to stick to your guns and stand up for what's right, even if everyone else in the group is giving into peer pressure, positional bias, political correctness, and a host of other means by which appropriate group dynamics decay into the cesspool of group-think.

    3. Apply appropriate group dynamics. Hundreds of books have been written on this subject, yet it was never more than a few paragraphs in any of my MBA management classes. I certainly didn't hear about it while studying engineering. Bottom line, it means don't pressure others. State your case and avoid the pressure tactics. Stick to the facts, not the politics, and by all means, avoid political correctness like the plague.

    As to whether or not BAUT's staff are idiots, I'd have to say by and large, "No." Two or three of them, however, certainly were.

    The rest is merely ignorant of the difference between appropriate group dynamics and the cesspool of group-think, but I'll continue this back on the Watch-a-BAUT thread.
    My oath of office never expires. "God, who gave us life, gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?" - Thomas Jefferson. "I have far too long suffered fools. No longer will I tolerate the insufferable. Enjoy the vacuum." - Mugs

    PS: I scrambled my password, so no, I will not be responding. Get a clue.

  10. #10
    Moderator Neverfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Utopia Planetia, Mars
    Posts
    1,782

    Default Re: Mugailiens handing out infractions for using the word ignorant.

    Sheesh, you should see mine. He's racked up 11 infractions for me in the last hour- after modifying the rules this morning, of course... Oh, I'm sorry- I was only supposed to say this in private where no one can see the truth, right?
    That's the New Rules that he just added and hit me up with infractions for- though he refers to posts made before he made that rule up into the rules thread today.
    I guess THIS post is now worth One True and Honest Infraction point.

    Also, he would call this post telling the truth about his dishonest and corrupt behavior as "Self Destructing" to get banned. Too. No one would ever guess it might be an attempt to stand up to his behavior... Let's start a new thread, shall we? No Confidence Thread.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •