Fussy moderation in 'Sustainability & Environmental issues'

djpbarry

easychair wrote: »

...there is not general agreement in the scientific community about the Hockey Stick graph.

Assuming that by "the scientific community" you mean (in this instance) "the paleoclimatological community", then yes, there is general agreement, which manifests itself in IPCC assessment reports. Feel free to argue otherwise in the relevant thread.

easychair

djpbarry wrote: »

Assuming that by "the scientific community" you mean (in this instance) "the paleoclimatological community", then yes, there is general agreement, which manifests itself in IPCC assessment reports. Feel free to argue otherwise in the relevant thread.

It seems unusual you appear to be unaware that there has been, and is, much disagreement across many scientific disciplines about the hockey Stick graph.

I have tried to explain that I used it as an example, and have said I have no desire to argue either side, so why you should keep telling me to "feel free" is a mystery, and comes over as patronising.

I imagine you can also feel free to argue whatever points you have on the issue in whatever threads you feel appropriate, but I would not patronise you by saying so.

djpbarry

easychair wrote: »

It seems unusual you appear to be unaware that there has been, and is, much disagreement across many scientific disciplines about the hockey Stick graph.

Oh, I'm perfectly aware of disagreement. However, this disagreement has not prevented a consensus opinion being committed to paper in the form of IPCC assessment reports – it doesn’t matter how many people disagree with it, it is still a consensus. Likewise, the existence of disagreement in this thread has not prevented the formation of a consensus on how the SEI forum should operate going forward.

nesf

easychair wrote: »

It seems unusual you appear to be unaware that there has been, and is, much disagreement across many scientific disciplines about the hockey Stick graph.

I have tried to explain that I used it as an example, and have said I have no desire to argue either side, so why you should keep telling me to "feel free" is a mystery, and comes over as patronising.

I imagine you can also feel free to argue whatever points you have on the issue in whatever threads you feel appropriate, but I would not patronise you by saying so.

I think you're confusing consensus with there being no disagreement on an issue. It's not that simple.

Macha

Consensus does not mean unanimity.

jimdeans

I would just like to say that I used to read the SEI forum a lot when I was a registered user.

I'm a scientist (though not in the climate field) and agree with the consensus.

But I stopped reading after a few months because djpbarry is so obnoxious to the userbase. I probably agree with him more than I'd like, but his tone is just unprofessional.

To me it's a massive and obvious problem. But, as was always the way, the higher ups don't want to hear it.

Scofflaw

jimdeans wrote: »

I would just like to say that I used to read the SEI forum a lot when I was a registered user.

I'm a scientist (though not in the climate field) and agree with the consensus.

But I stopped reading after a few months because djpbarry is so obnoxious to the userbase. I probably agree with him more than I'd like, but his tone is just unprofessional.

To me it's a massive and obvious problem. But, as was always the way, the higher ups don't want to hear it.

To be fair, one of the two outcomes of this thread is that djpbarry has offered to take a back seat for a while.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Chloe Pink

djpbarry wrote: »

Ok – this has already been covered.

Thank you Macha amd djpbarry.

What is the the outcome though of the cmods offer please?

djpbarry

Chloe Pink wrote: »

What is the the outcome though of the cmods offer please?

I'm not sure what you mean? The CMods will intervene if requested to do so - this is pretty much the norm in terms of dispute resolution anyway.

nesf

Chloe Pink wrote: »

What is the the outcome though of the cmods offer please?

The offer is an ongoing promise of help being available for moderating by myself, Scofflaw and Dades. So if the mods feel they are too involved they can ask us to take a look at it and see if action is needed.

Should help some bit in the more heated threads.

Chloe Pink

djpbarry wrote: »

I'm not sure what you mean? The CMods will intervene if requested to do so - this is pretty much the norm in terms of dispute resolution anyway.

I'm not talking about this in reference to dispute resolution, but in circumstances where a mod is heavily engaged in discussion with a poster and moderation is needed of the poster with whom the moderator is engaged.

Posts 286 to 290 inclusive, relate directly to this matter.

To be direct about the matter, I suppose I'm saying it would be good to see your view on this offer from the cmods to mod for you where you are heavily engaged in discussion with a poster and moderation is needed of the poster with whom you are engaged.

(Macha expressed his view in post 364)

djpbarry

Chloe Pink wrote: »

To be direct about the matter, I suppose I'm saying it would be good to see your view on this offer from the cmods to mod for you where you are heavily engaged in discussion with a poster and moderation is needed of the poster with whom you are engaged.

I have already expressed my view – I will ask a CMod to intervene if I feel it is necessary. I’m not sure how I can make that any clearer.

Chloe Pink

djpbarry wrote: »

I have already expressed my view

Thanks djpbarry, I hadn't realised, maybe I missed the relevant post, if so my apologies.

Yitzhak Rabin

I'd say its fair enough to lock up this thread now. Its just become a constant repeat of the same points over and over, or a proxy thread to debate AGW.

I'd like to say fair play to djpbarry, its not easy to take the flak you have for the last 400 odd posts. Its a very mature step to offer to stand back. Hopefully everyone can take on board the main points in this thread and SEI will have a more vibrant future.

easychair

yekahS wrote: »

I'd say its fair enough to lock up this thread now. Its just become a constant repeat of the same points over and over, or a proxy thread to debate AGW.

I'd like to say fair play to djpbarry, its not easy to take the flak you have for the last 400 odd posts. Its a very mature step to offer to stand back. Hopefully everyone can take on board the main points in this thread and SEI will have a more vibrant future.

I couldn't agree more. In fact, as you and I both agree, you could say there is a consensus to lock up this thread now.

Even if 100 000 other boards members disagree, and it's still just us two who agree, we can still claim we have a consensus.

jimdeans

Scofflaw wrote: »

To be fair, one of the two outcomes of this thread is that djpbarry has offered to take a back seat for a while.

cordially,
Scofflaw

My humble opinion is that the higher-ups would not have made him do that if he'd not offered.

jimdeans

easychair wrote: »

I couldn't agree more. In fact, as you and I both agree, you could say there is a consensus to lock up this thread now.

Even if 100 000 other boards members disagree, and it's still just us two who agree, we can still claim we have a consensus.

Well played sir :cool:

Scofflaw

easychair wrote: »

I couldn't agree more. In fact, as you and I both agree, you could say there is a consensus to lock up this thread now.

Even if 100 000 other boards members disagree, and it's still just us two who agree, we can still claim we have a consensus.

Between the two of you, certainly.

amused,
Scofflaw

Mollymawk

I have been following this forum with interest since I first joined Boards last December. As an adult with fairly strong opinions and a genuine interest in environmental issues, I am terrified to post here. I have no problem entering into an intelligent debate with anybody, but I think this particular forum often resembles a schoolyard stone-throwing game, and many interesting opinions are treated with blatant sarcasm, both by the general public and the mods.

I'm sure there are plenty more like me who would love to be part of the discussion, but don't fancy getting into a scrap over it. Shame, really. There's fantastic potential for intelligent debate here, and for us all to learn from each other.

easychair

Mollymawk wrote: »

I have been following this forum with interest since I first joined Boards last December. As an adult with fairly strong opinions and a genuine interest in environmental issues, I am terrified to post here. I have no problem entering into an intelligent debate with anybody, but I think this particular forum often resembles a schoolyard stone-throwing game, and many interesting opinions are treated with blatant sarcasm, both by the general public and the mods.

Indeed, it seems that there is a consensus that the treatment of some posters in the past has put off some posters. Here's hoping that that will change, and SEI can return to being an interesting place of good humoured debate.

stantom

As a newbie, I received a message from DJ Barry saying I am to be barred from taking part in Sustainability and Environmental fora.

I made a post there along the lines of the following, although the post is gone form the thread.

analyst2 wrote: »

It has always seemed to me that the subject of
climate change/global warming should be taken seriously, and if in doubt we
should err on the side of caution. It has become increasing obvious,
however, that some or many scientists involved and leading the case for
climate change/global warming are not always as scrupulous, or as honest, as
they should be, and in some cases have been downright dishonest to skew the
facts and evidence to make their case seem more than it was.



The first concerns were raised with the exposure of the "hockey stick"
graph, a graph on which many scientists based their predictions, and which
was, essentially, shown to be worthless and created out of a small amount of
virtually meaningless data. Then the Climategate emails were exposed, which
showed how data was manipulated, and how scientists, men who were supposed
to be impartial and interested in finding the truth, stopped at nothing to
discredit anyone who challenged what they called, in the emails, "the
Cause". Scientists look at evidence, and when scientists manipulate evidence
and discredit those who have different evidence, alarm bells start to ring.



Perhaps the most worrying of all was that the IPCC, a body entrusted by
the world to find the truth, was exposed as a body who manipulated data and
whose reports had not been based on science, but often on scare stories
dreamed up by environmental activists.



A further example of this was the scandal that emerged last week, with the
release on the internet of various documents from the Heartland Institute, a
Chicago think-tank long vilified by the scientists who were making claims
based on bogus data, for organising conferences attended by hundreds of
distinguished scientists from across the world who dared to be sceptical of
the orthodoxy.



Global temperatures have failed to rise as the computer models, upon which
the whole scientific claims were based, said they would. The whole climate
change/global warming argument is looking more and more shaky, and even if
they are eventually proved right, those scientists who have manipulated data
and used bogus evidence should be ashamed of themselves for bringing the
whole subject into near ridicule.



My hope is that we can learn the lesson to "believe" less and know
more.

djpbarry wrote: »

Name one such scientist.

The poster has made some interesting points (not all of which I support) but
to reply by taking one reasonable insignificant point, and ignoring the
rest, seems to be nit picking and not very friendly.



Having looked back at these threads earlier, this used to be a place of
quite lively and interesting discussion, but I'd not be posting here if this
is how mods behave. That's my tuppence worth.

I called another member who recommended boards to me and she directed me to this thread. She also used to post in the Sustainability & Environmental Fora but no longer does for the reason that she finds the same moderator overbearing and haughty, and says that it spoiled it for her.

Overheal

I've responded in that thread with what feels like a pretty fair solution. Don't know why Barry felt it was necessarily to make himself come across as a bully when all he needed to do was establish a counterpoint. I've done it for him.

Scofflaw

stantom wrote: »

As a newbie, I received a message from DJ Barry saying I am to be barred from taking part in Sustainability and Environmental fora.

I made a post there along the lines of the following, although the post is gone form the thread.

The poster has made some interesting points (not all of which I support) but
to reply by taking one reasonable insignificant point, and ignoring the
rest, seems to be nit picking and not very friendly.

Having looked back at these threads earlier, this used to be a place of
quite lively and interesting discussion, but I'd not be posting here if this
is how mods behave. That's my tuppence worth.

I called another member who recommended boards to me and she directed me to this thread. She also used to post in the Sustainability & Environmental Fora but no longer does for the reason that she finds the same moderator overbearing and haughty, and says that it spoiled it for her.

The entire contention analyst2 is making, though, is that climate scientists have dishonestly manipulated data, something for which he gives a series of claimed examples.

Asking the poster to name one such scientist seems entirely reasonable. If you claim Irish politicians are corrupt, then you should be able to name at least one such politician and detail at least some of their corruption - otherwise you're just blowing hot air.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Overheal

True but it also seems reasonable in this case to just reply stating several independent investigations, multinationally, found the findings to be untrue. Not much more to be said after that really.

stantom

Overheal wrote: »

I've responded in that thread with what feels like a pretty fair solution. Don't know why Barry felt it was necessarily to make himself come across as a bully when all he needed to do was establish a counterpoint. I've done it for him.

thanks. I've looked at this thread and it seems to be an issue in that forum for some time. lots of lads here have said they find him aggressive, unfriendly and combatative, and threatening. its a shame he can't seem to just stop it and behave normally.

oscarBravo

Overheal wrote: »

Don't know why Barry felt it was necessarily to make himself come across as a bully when all he needed to do was establish a counterpoint.

I don't know why you feel it necessary to describe someone making a point in a different manner to that which you would have done as "bullying".

Bullying is a serious issue. Let's not devalue it by using it to mean "asking questions in a manner that could be construed as offensive by someone who's easily offended".

djpbarry

Overheal wrote: »

Don't know why Barry felt it was necessarily to make himself come across as a bully...

Asking simple questions is bullying now?

Overheal wrote: »

...when all he needed to do was establish a counterpoint. I've done it for him.

You didn't "establish a counter-point", you just copy-pasted a wall of text from Wikipedia, the content of which has very little to do with the question I had asked.

stantom

oscarBravo wrote: »

I don't know why you feel it necessary to describe someone making a point in a different manner to that which you would have done as "bullying".

Bullying is a serious issue. Let's not devalue it by using it to mean "asking questions in a manner that could be construed as offensive by someone who's easily offended".

Speaking personally, I haven't taken any offence. Its revealing to read through this thread and the many people who say the same or similar things. As yet, I am on page 24 and have not seen anyone say they have taken offence. Where have you seen the people to whom you refer to as taking offence, as it seems to me its more a case of lads saying they prefer to avoid the forum due to the mod being threatening and unfriendly.

uruguay

djpbarry wrote: »

Asking simple questions is bullying now?
You didn't "establish a counter-point", you just copy-pasted a wall of text from Wikipedia, the content of which has very little to do with the question I had asked.

In fairness, you did come over as unfriendly to me, as an impartial observer. Have you not read what loads of guys say here, in this thread, and how you come across to them also? I've just finished reading the thread myself, and there seems to be a consistency in what quite a few others say about how many find your style, & dont post in sustainability & environment due to it.

stantom

I don't want to make a big deal of it, but I was taken aback by the mod djbarry. I'm not surprised that so few post there if thats the was he normally is.