Print

Print


I too am appalled at Tom's posts here. I don't 
know why Tom -- who can be really brilliant at 
times, and who has lots of great historical 
insights, chooses to relate to people the way he 
sometimes does. I have my insights into this, 
having known Tom for 30 years, but no need to burden the list with those.

He is on several listserves that I run, and I pre-moderate his posts.

He's also engaged in a good, non-aggressive 
discussion with some SftP members off list.

I've re-posted Kamran's responses (not this one, 
though) to the ActionGreens listserve, just in 
case people there are interested in any of this. 
I recommend not knee-jerk reacting to Tom's 
emotional outbursts, nor create permanent bans 
because of somethings he's said in the heat of 
the moment. Keep him at 3-month suspension, which 
I think is quite fair, and I would be willing to 
pre-moderate his posts to this listserve and not 
let any through that personally attack people 
here, the way he has done, if you can set up the appropriate filters ....

Mitchel



At 01:33 PM 11/6/2013, Kamran Nayeri wrote:
>Dear All,
>
>I don't know if this first of the three messages 
>sent by Mr. Smith was sent to you this morning. 
>Please note how he ends it: "I have no use for 
>your pathetic list. It is biased, conservative, 
>and repressive. Stick it up your respective 
>assholes."  Clearly, Mr. Smith did not join this 
>list to build it as he never showed any respect 
>for others who took a different view and he is 
>already bad-mouthing SftP to others outside of 
>this affair, including actiongreens (that Mitchel runs) and someone named Seth.
>
>In this light, as a member of this list I move 
>to convert Mr. Smith's three month 
>prohibitionary ban decided by the MC to BAN FROM 
>THE LIST.  Not to do so undermines the goal of SftP list.
>
>Best regards,
>
>Kamran
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>From: Thomas Smith <<mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]>
>Date: Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 6:52 AM
>Subject: RE: Prohibitionary ban from Science for the People List
>To: Kamran Nayeri 
><<mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]>, 
><mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask], 
><mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]
>Cc: 
><mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask], 
><mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]
>
>
>I do not remember any comments from either Mr. 
>Fox or Ms. Smallhouse warning me or taking me to 
>task for any of the comments reprinted below. It 
>appears that neither of these people, nor you 
>yourself, understand your responsibilities as 
>moderators, nor the difference between the truth 
>and a baldfaced lie—covering your tracks.
>
>
>
>I have no use for your pathetic list. It is 
>biased, conservative, and repressive. Stick it up your respective assholes.
>
>
>
>thomas
>
>
>
>From: Kamran Nayeri [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: Wednesday, November 6, 2013 9:43 AM
>To: <mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]
>Subject: Prohibitionary ban from Science for the People List
>
>
>
>Mr. Thomas Smith:
>
>
>
>On behalf of the SftP Moderating Council (MC), I 
>want to inform you of our decision to put you on 
>probationary ban from the list for a period of 
>approximately three months, ending on January 
>31, 2014.  We will send you a notice when the 
>time comes to rejoin the list on February 1, 
>2014 if you so chose with the understanding that 
>similar conduct will result in your permanent ban from the list.
>
>
>
>A collegial and constructive mode of conduct is 
>essential to the wellbeing of the list and fulfilling of its goal.
>
>
>
>Unfortunately, from time to time the purpose of 
>the list and individuals who have joined are 
>undermined by destructive conduct.
>
>
>
>In your recent posts, not only you have chosen 
>to attack individuals who you disagreed with but 
>also call them names.  Such behavior cannot be 
>tolerated as it undermines the very purpose of 
>the list and people who have joined it.  What is 
>worse, when two members of the MC—Herb Fox and 
>Mandi Smallhorne— tried to draw your attention 
>to the norms of conduct as specified by our 
>Guidelines, you not only did not heed their request but also attacked them.
>
>
>
>Below you can find examples of your conduct:
>
>
>
>On October 25, responding to Herb Fox you wrote:
>
>“It is just another canard you are creating, Mr. 
>Fox. You seem to me to be a pseudo-liberal, who 
>would like people to believe he has an open 
>mind, but whose only real claim to “liberalism” 
>is that he tries to shut the Marxists up. This 
>sort of hypocrisy infuriates me about you ‘liberals.’”
>
>
>
>October 26 post written in response to a post by 
>Mandi Smallhorne addressing Herb Fox’s attempt 
>to draw your attention to the list’s Guidelines you wrote:
>
>“What a naughty boy am I for violating the 
>bullshit-“liberal,” in reality anti-communist 
>and demagogic rules insisted upon by Mr. Fox.”
>
>
>
>On October 26, in another post you called Mandi Smallhorne a liar:
>
>“Ahhh, a “quack buster”….
>
>This is rubbish, Mandi. Your action was 
>thoroughly repressive, and thus have nothing to 
>do with science, and if successful would have 
>deprived a cash-starved WBAI and Pacifica not 
>only a great voice for science, and you 
>certainly don’t understand it, but a powerful source of revenue….
>
>‘…This is pure mendaciousness, like your other lies here…’”
>
>
>
>I append to the bottom of this note a copy of 
>the Science for the People List Guidelines. This 
>letter will be sent to all members of the list 
>to notify them of this decision.
>
>
>
>I hope you will find this note in the spirit 
>intended—to fulfill the Moderating Council’s 
>responsibility to safeguard the mission of the list.
>
>
>
>Best wishes,
>
>
>
>For the Moderating Council,
>
>Kamran Nayeri
>
>November 5, 2013
>
>
>
>Moderating Council members are Sam E. Anderson, 
>Eric Entemann, Herb Fox, Kamran Nayeri, Claudia 
>Pine, Laurence Romsted and Mandi Smallhorne.
>
>
>
>Science for the People list guidelines:
>
>
>
>1.      The list's primary concern is to promote 
>the interests of the world of the non-scientists 
>(essentially the world's population) by 
>promoting examples of science in the service of 
>the people and exposing the use of science in 
>ways that are destructive of the well-being of the world's population.
>2.      No-one who is interested in the 
>substance of the discussion will be excluded.
>3.      No subject that is relevant to the 
>list's primary concern will be excluded. Purely 
>political posts that could and do take place in 
>other fora should not be introduced.  If they 
>are, the member will be warned once by a 
>moderator that if they continue, they will be place on moderation.
>4.      Any and all members who indulge in ad 
>hominem attacks will be placed on moderation for 
>a period to be determined by the Moderating 
>Council. Science for the People is a forum for 
>open and thoughtful discussion. Should a member 
>post on a topic with which other members 
>disagree, no matter how intensely, members are 
>expected to respond the content of the post, not the person who sent it.
>5.      When any member of the Moderating 
>Council contributes to the list serve in that 
>capacity, the post will clearly identify that he 
>or she is speaking with the authority of the Moderating Council.
>6.      The Moderating Council will have the 
>authority to declare a subject closed if it 
>becomes clear that opposing views have been 
>adequately aired and discussion is going nowhere.
>7.      The Moderating Council will confer with 
>each other (at least a quorum of three) if a 
>decision to place a member on moderation, or any 
>other serious decision, is in play.
>8.      If queries arise about the decisions of 
>the Moderating Council, members should feel completely free to discuss them.
>
>