Mike DiCenso wrote:Look, while it is possible that SWST is young and inexperianced with debate matters, he/she brought this on themself simply because instead of backing off, thinking the matter clearly, they continued to argue, and even created several new threads when SWST could even handle debating in the already existing threads.
I don't really wish to make excuses for him, I'm simply pointing out that it isn't simple trolling. He has made multiple infractions against the board and has refused many times to even consider them or he tries to handwave it away with some excuse. That isn't acceptable and should be met out.
I would also like to point out that more than one of us have let our ego's slip into the debate a few times, so there is that to consider as well. Again, not an excuse, given the history he has of doing it.
So the ultimate responsibility for what is going on rests with SWST, not anyone else.
No doubt about it. But to quote Picard, we must measure our responses appropriately.
And by we, I mean the staff with
actual authority. Half of us in this thread really don't have a say in the matter either way. :p
And yes, Mith, you are correct, there is no shame in conceeding a point that you cannot argue with because you did not at the time have any evidence, but which you later can revisit with new evidence. We have given him/her that option on several occasions, but so far SWST has not taken them up, so my sympathy level for him/her is not that high right now.
I agree and I haven't even seen half of the threads he's responded to. Perhaps we should look at what sort of punishment should be met out and see what a reasonable response is to the infraction, instead of if he is deserving. I don't think that's too much in doubt.
Another issue is the honesty one. Using a low-canon source to try and push through an agenda when the higher level source is saying something different is dishonesty, whether SWST realizes this or not. The hypermatter issue is the most prominent one, where SWST is trying to use circular logic to attempt to validate the Saxton-authored ICS books, claiming, for example, that the ICS is validated in the Death Star novel when it is not, and even contradicted within said novel as well as other, higher-canon sources, such as the ANH novelization. So he/she is not even paying any attention to the canon hierarchy, just kind of treating it all as the same.
I don't really recall those threads too much, but the Death Star incident sounds more like a case of immense stupidity than anything else. Then again, I suppose one is desperate enough...
I'll take your word on it though. At some point he must have realized the problem with his claims.
Also, while it is possible that SWST made a genuine mistake on the Dominion War fan made video, it was all too apparent that it was fan-made, and you could read in the commentary numerous subscribers discussiing the cut footage from all the non-Star Trek movies and TV shows. In other words he/she did not fact check, and when it was brought up in the thread, hastily tried to defend it as genuine. While you could say that was an honest mistake in and of itself, it would become apparent that over time SWST was simply ignoring people's assertions, links to sources and so on that proved the video was fan made. In addtion to that, prior to the posting of the fan video, he/she also posted an obvious photoshopped image, and claimed it was geninue image from an episode, and again ignored people pointing that out and their evidence. So that's two times now.
That is problematic, though I find the image more so. What was the image and the source? Or is it something that you believe that he actually photoshopped himself? If it's the later, then that is clearly worth a nice ban. I don't think I've really ever encountered someone who provided something as blagarently false data as that.
So at what point do you stop cutting slack, call BS, and start to apply discipline?
-Mike
I wouldn't know, that's not my job.:P
But if it were, then I'll be honest and say that he does deserve a ban and I'd probably have handed out a ban long before now. He's constantly ignored our rules (which he is required to read before joining and is held to their standard, even if he didn't), he's constantly ignored basic debating standards, he's provided false data and when this was pointed out to him he continued to ignore it, and he's constantly referred to anyone who disagrees with him as 'anti-star wars wanking' or 'trek wankers' or some other demeaning term that doesn't help facilitate, but rather stifle it. He's been giving multiple chances, multiple warnings, and every time he tries to downplay his offenses and then tries to act like he's the one who we should be apologizing to.
And then he does it again and again because we're too wary of becoming like the people we critic in regards to holding polorazing stances that they disagree with (SB.com and SD.net). In this case, he's abused our generosity.