What becomes of old 'friends'..

[Kiwi]

I've often seen a flurry of replies to a newcomer that in my opinion have been very nasty, and I have often been appalled at the lack of both brains and manners in some of our regulars.

Why do some people have to behave like that?  Too big an ego?  Insecurity?  Built-in, permanent nastiness?  There is absolutely no need for it.  It does nothing for our side and makes us all look bad.

Perhaps we need some system besides PMs were we can jointly express our disgust at such behaviour and ask the perpetrators to pull themselves together, grow up and show a little more decency.

Rant over, changing the subject to good posts:

I re-read this wonderful old thread at CosmoQuest last night, and was very impressed by some of the replies.
http://cosmoquest.org/forum/showthread.php?8184-Has-any-HB-dared-challenge-Gene-Kranz&p=147239#post147239
It was started nearly ten years ago at the Bad Astronomy Bulletin Board, was resurrected years later and wandered completely off the original subject.  There are some marvellous replies about the "missing" Apollo 11 video, and as often happens one JayUtah posted some excellent information about that and about using intuition in the engineering field.  It also has the usual HB's ignoring of the information supplied.

[Allan F]

Sometimes, I believe, the harsh replies are triggered by recognition of one of the usual suspects, who show up in disguise, but whose language and ideas reveals his/her identity.

[twik]

I think it's a bit like "compassion overload". Someone new to the discussion is more likely to take posters who start off with "I have always believed in Apollo, but I have one, small nagging question, could anyone help me with it?" at face value. However, soon one starts to see that this is often not an honest post, but a ploy. Eventually, the occasional new poster who simply *does* have an honest question gets snapped at. When you are dealing with mostly wolves in sheeps' clothing, the occasional genuine sheep triggers a suspicious response.

Unfortunately, I've seen several cases where a new poster started off like this, people agreed to give him/her a chance and assume s/he was legitimate, only to show later on that s/he was simply using the "just asking questions" gambit.

[gillianren]

Unfortunately, I've seen several cases where a new poster started off like this, people agreed to give him/her a chance and assume s/he was legitimate, only to show later on that s/he was simply using the "just asking questions" gambit.

Yeah, it does happen.  And it does happen that it's someone we've seen before who really is pathetic enough to come back with a sock puppet.  I don't care.  I still prefer to err on the side of politeness, and I think that, if we are claiming to educate anyone, we should make it our goal to do so every time.  I don't believe we're ever going to convince the hardcore conspiracists, which is the usual argument for just giving up and being rude.  But I don't believe that being rude convinces the people who are just kind of ignorant or the people who might come along later and read the conversation.  I'm not convinced that being rude convinces anyone, though I've had a few people argue to me that it does.

Anyway, think of it as anger management training.  If you can keep your calm with these people, who are after all online--where you can walk away from the keyboard--it's good practice in keeping your calm with idiots you encounter in person and actually have to work with.  Or, sigh, are related to.

[Glom]

When someone new does come along eventually (been very quiet lately) we must all vow to be nice and not presumptive.

[ChrLz]

Hmm.  To those saying we are too hard on newbies..  I'm probably an offender, but who would know with these sort of generalisations - please give examples (I can take it! ).  After all, we often criticise others for handwaving and not being specific.  And surely the correct time to deal with a snarky/inappropriate post is at that time - with a suitable reply or get LO to adjudicate/censor/remove/ask poster to revise.

And it's a harsh world, that one of reality we live in...

[Count Zero]

And it's a harsh world, that one of reality we live in...

Nice hand-wave; worthy of every CT-ist who ever bleated, "The Government always lies - therefore The Official Story is a lie!"

In the context of this discussion, bullshit.  The world of this forum is precisely defined by the words written here.  It cannot be harsh unless someone makes a decision to type harsh words and click "post".  These are conscious actions for which individuals are 100% responsible.   Nothing out there in the meat-world absolves you of your responsibility for the words you write and the tone they take - either out there or in here.

This world is what we make of it.



[/harsh words]

[raven]

Though by no means always successful, I aim at trying to live by the Paradoxical Commandments.
Yes, the world is harsh place, a world of lives nasty, brutish, and short, a world with hate and violence, ignorance and treachery, but I see no legitimate reason to make it any harsher my own actions.
Cynicism is just laziness.

[AtomicDog]

Can someone give me examples of threads where innocent newcomers were snapped at?

[gillianren]

How about this one?

http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=378.0

Someone came in making it very clear that they knew the argument was flawed and just wanting to know how it was flawed, and they were told to go back to sucking at Jack White's teat.

[qt]

I have to say, if I saw something in a documentary, a web page, or some similar place about Apollo that I didn't understand, I'd think long and hard about whether I really wanted to ask about it here.

I wouldn't think long and hard at BAUT at all, if I see a debunking which is itself bunk, I know better than to say anything.

[AtomicDog]

How about this one?

http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=378.0

Someone came in making it very clear that they knew the argument was flawed and just wanting to know how it was flawed, and they were told to go back to sucking at Jack White's teat.

That's a good example,  all right.  Granted,  it wasn't a pile-on, but I do remember being a little embarrassed following that thread.

[Noldi400]

I see where you guys are coming from; but what other Apollo astronaut would have popped Sibrel? Just sayin' 

You has a truth.

Still, there were other quick-tempered moonwalkers. I wonder what some of the others might have done if caught in the situation Buzz was.

Cernan? Shepard?  Conrad would just have given him a cussing that would have left him blind, bald, and staggering in circles.  And Ed Mitchell, after all, did kick him in the ass and threaten to throw him out of the house physically if he didn't leave instantly.

"....as a writer, I am a very sensitive fellow, but I am also a man, and real men don’t give into their sensitivities.  Only sissy-men do that.  Therefore I drink.  How else can I face the existential horror of it all and continue to work? Besides, come on, I can handle it.  A real man always can"

But King himself rejects this notion. He states that the mixture of creative endeavour with mind-altering substances "is one of the great pop-intellectual myths of our time.”

Kind of like when musicians think they play better when toked up.  They really just think they're playing better.

[darren r]

Kind of like when musicians think they play better when toked up.  They really just think they're playing better.

God, yeah. I really like the comedy musings of Bill Hicks, but that's the most irritating claim he makes.

[slang]

Solon was back for a while on Cosmoquest, but was suspended after a few pages.

I must admit, I wish they'd allow Solon a little more leeway, just to see if he will ever drop a hint about *why* he believes scientists are covering up the "fact" that you can't see light in space.

Try to find his first posts there. It was to do about some weird guru type putting the world of astronomy upside down with his new insights or something. IIRC stars not being real or similarly weird stuff. He's already used up a lot of leeway, btw.