Why bother?

I am sorry for your loss. It says that the discussion is closed in red text right above the "Good Answers" box. I would also like to point out that while it may have been a bit unfair for Blink to have his discussion closed, but he seemed to be just ranting against Roger Pink at the end of his post. And at the end he acts like Roger closed the discussion just to spite Blink. I think that as the maker of the blog, if Roger wanted to close the discussion because it wasn't going in a direction he wanted is his prerogative (he did write the blog).

Once again, I am sorry for your loss. I hope CR4 preoccupied you a little bit.

Several months ago there was a thread titled something like "What is the definition of engineer?"

My response was "Roger Pink." [That was mostly in jest. R.P. has a special avatar, "The Engineer," so why not grab it as a definition?]

My reply disappeared, without explanation.

I waited a day or two and simply reposted it. I don't know if it still exists, but at least it lasted longer the second time.

Perhaps some soul-searching is due in the CR4 hierarchy, or lowerarchy as the case may be.

First, passingtongreen, regarding your feline family member:

There are no words.

Second, regarding "Why bother":

The issues you discuss here are upsetting a number of members... I very much hope we can all play together nicely, or many will exodus as Blink has done.

As one must have seen from the post of Matt in the Blink's post (again closed)

There has been a obvious reason for decline of CR4. The quality has gone definitely down.

A lot of the contributors are leaving.

The reasons are inane quality of post, but quite a bit of flak may go to admins too. can one explain really why a post gets closed if one criticises an admin or CR4 itself?

This unfortunately shows the highhandedness of the controllers of the forum. I had my on escapades with a few of the members (including of course Roger) as a member and now as guest (no I am not BBB- or expelled by CR4- I am self abstaining).

A forum and its admins should be able to take criticism on its path and take it constructively. Closing a thread is no solution.

Jaxy said that it was Roger's blog and he has all the rights to close it. I remember in an earlier thread (not a blog) the OP has asked to close it - but some one has mentioned, that he/she- was it Georgia? she is missing for a long time - starting a thread is your's prerogative, then it takes it's own life, and dies a natural death.

I had my own fun as member. Then as the things started getting muddy, i waited with a hope things will clear. But it didn't then I stopped logging and became a guest.

This made me further realize the intolerant attitudes of the newer members (oldies are a bit more tolerant - I have not encountered the chance of having DC, Kris, PWS, Chris,... asking me to log-in in not so polite manner) Only once some one of my genre asked me to join subsequent to some post he liked.

To improve the situation

- All are anonymous - even registered members - so it doesn't matter whether you are logged in, joined with a fictitious name or not.

- The CR4 and its administrators must be a bit more restrained in their actions and take the criticism in their own stride.

- It should be understood that criticism is not enmity. You have your view point, I have mine. If they clash definitely i am going to justify mine, and you yours, does it need a public fight?

- The members should understand, especially the new members - the posts and the questions should carry some substance. not something so simple that - as almost 50% of the posts now you see the first answer post is advise is google or wiki (and actually the posts that should have this advise may be more than this) - You must understand there is no point in diluting a forum to a level that people lose interest. I can name a list of posts that requires this or even less (common sense would have been enough).

- When there is a genuine question, provide some information, why make the members guess and give the information piecemeal?

And in the end, unfortunately i too have to point to Roger (though he is not the reason of my leaving CR4- well to be frank I have not left, I visit it once in a while to help the needy- though their numbers are dropping and are a bit difficult to fine since as I log in after a few days I see a huge number of unread posts from my last visit in the only few forums I visit and it becomes difficult to search the needles from the haystack). The administrators of forums are technically moderators and they should be moderate in actual terms too. I had quite a few occasions of clash of ideas with Milo (at least couple of times), Andy (ditto) etc, some times I won, some times they, but they had been kind enough to accept. But unfortunately can you say the same? You are not alone, there had been another, whose unfortunately a few posts I had occasion to counter and he had an impression that I was trying to target him (he came out literally). Now after I open a post, If i see one of the names, I don't put my comment and move away - a registered member had those then the guest - i might as well be burnt on stakes.

Sorry I have been too verbose, but the forum should understand it's shortcomings and correct itself. Unlike Blink, I will continue to visit once in a while, (hopefully he will too) may be there will be some rare posts where I will be of help.

Firstly, I'm not a moderator and don't have the ability to close threads. I used to be a moderator, but as many people now know there is a new moderation team and I was blissfully able to be free of that horrid responsibility. The new team is working very hard and doing a good job. As time goes on they will do a better job. It's hard work.

Secondly, I asked for Antiscience to be closed because I felt the discussion was just getting presonal between Blink and I and really didn't have much to do with the original post at all. It's my blog and I think I have the right to request the discussion be shut down. I requested it be shut down and it was. Now you know the reason, even though I said that in the last comment on Antiscience anyway.

The whole Antiscience experience has left a bad taste in my mouth. Dont get me wrong, In a weird way, I kind of like being portrayed as some sort of religious nut....I mean really, me?.....Has it come to the point now that if you object to being called irrational for believing in God that you're a nut......maybe, I don't know. I like to believe that I'm a pretty rational person.

Anyway, I put a lot of earnestness into writing that blog and it has turned into something ugly. All that effort and because I basically objected to being called irrational for my beliefs (and calling Blink's argument defending the statement as ridiculous, which is what set him off) I have been getting hit pretty hard.

That's ok though, I figure it will die down in time. I will finish and post Antiscience Part II. This time I won't make the mistake of allowing comments. That was just a bad idea. Not allowing comments may cause some anger too, but it's my blog, so whatever. In a week nobodies gonna care about what I wrote. In a way I'm writing it for myself anyway.

Hope that clears things up.

Roger

Passing

I Lost my Dog 'Zippo' 2 yrs ago and I' m Still not over it.

I don't understand why Religion and Science have such a difficult time

"Coexisting". Is it because the proponents from each side strain to gain the upper

hand? Who Knows?

GOD IS DEAD....NITZSCHE

NITZSCHE IS DEAD .... GOD

Anyway You and I are neighbors I Live in Lionville North on rte 100

The epistemological assumptions and habits of religion and science are quite different. One is way better than the other, and the other doesn't like this. Your koan for the day is to meditate on which is which.

--Eugen I