Response To Charges Against THE FORUM

[RationalBiker]

that it should either delete Diana's posts or allow us an opportunity to challenge her charges somewhere on OO.net?

As part of the moderating team, sometimes we all don't agree on the method which things should be handled. I think this can happen with any team effort, so I'm not really trying to place blame. In my opinion, her post was an attack that should have been deleted. However, that decision was not made.

That being the case, I think the next best solution is to end it now.

I still assert that no good will come of this thread, either for this board, or for the flourishing of a wonderful philosophy.

Now aside from the dispute between you and Ms. Hsieh, is the issue of questionable moderation. Some have argued your moderation is fair, others have argued otherwise. Personally speaking I think that you hold the advantage in that respect because if there is any evidence people might need to demonstrate that there was an issue in lopsided moderation, it is tucked away to where your detractors do not have access. Therefore, how can they prove it other than by providing anecdotal evidence (which you or others can easily deny). It becomes a question of who does one "believe".

Aequalsa is one such detractor, and for the time that I've known him on this forum, he's always seemed to be honest and quite sharp. If he says he observed a problem there, I have a hard time just dismissing his opinion.

Likewise, there are I know one or two folks on your forum who I also respect and think to be quite sharp. They say there isn't a problem. Do I believe them or just dismiss them?

So, who is one to believe without being able to fully review the evidence for themselves? Your fans or your detractors?

Personally, I find it difficult to come to a conclusion, and I suspect others might as well. That being the case, would you make available your database of deleted posts (assuming you still have them)? Otherwise, I'm not sure how that issue can be wholly resolved.

Given that Ms. Hsieh has said her opinion is not open for debate, I don't see that getting resolved.

This brings me back to square one... no good is likely to come from this thread.

Edited July 19, 2007 by RationalBiker

[Betsy]

To separate Dr. Peikoff from his statements is to further disrespect him. His statements represent his beliefs.

... which he has been known to change if he decides he is wrong. Is Dr. Peikoff separating himself from his statements when he changes his mind about something? Is he disrespecting himself?

What purpose does it serve to say that you think his beliefs are foolish, but he himself is not foolish?

Please get your facts straight. I never said Dr. Peikoff's election statement was foolish. Jack Wakeland said that and I disagree with Jack Wakeland.

Dr. Peikoff's election statement represents the lifetime of knowledge and thinking that went into making that statement. To call it foolish and embarrassing is to call Dr. Peikoff foolish and embarrassing.

I think that is wrong. Good, virtuous, heroic people are neither omniscient nor infallible. They can make mistakes. It is no disrespect to be honest and present them with evidence that they may be wrong about something. In fact, you are doing them a favor. I think it is VERY disrespectful to accept someone else's conclusion without thinking them through, especially if you have evidence to the contrary, and even if they are Ayn Rand or Leonard Peikoff. That would be taking them on faith and assuming that they are the kind of intellectual leaders who want to be taken on faith or have to be taken on faith.

You'll notice that GreedyCapitalist and Moose, in their initial criticism of the election statement, did not separate Dr. Peikoff from his beliefs. They judged his statement to be obviously wrong, and since they knew that Dr. Peikoff was no fool, they arrived at the, in my view, unfounded yet logically consistent notion that he was losing his mind in his old age.

I think that was a serious mistake. It is possible to disagree with someone you respect without resorting to unfounded speculations as to the cause of their error.

For this reason, I think the general criticism on OO.net was much more respectful of Dr. Peikoff than what we witnessed on The Forum for Ayn Rand Fans.

That figures. Different premises, different conclusions.

[Betsy]

Personally, I find it difficult to come to a conclusion, and I suspect others might as well. That being the case, would you make available your database of deleted posts (assuming you still have them)? Otherwise, I'm not sure how that issue can be wholly resolved.

I can't do that since deleted posts to THE FORUM are always returned to a poster in a PM containing an often lengthy explanation as to why the post was deleted and suggestions for turning it into an acceptable post. That's rather personal and I owe it to my members to keep those communications private.

Given that Ms. Hsieh has said her opinion is not open for debate, I don't see that getting resolved.

Neither do I.

How about we close these threads now and leave both Diana and her supporters' statements as well as mine up as posted? She's had her say and I've had mine.

I invite those who want more information from my side to read THE FORUM, especially this thread, and to contact me at betsy(at)speicher(dot)com.

[~Sophia~]

I simply request that posters to the Forum act in accordance with that judgment, since apparently none disagree with it -- or can be bothered to express any other view.

It may not mean that "none disagree with it". I don't support/agree/sanction personal attacks on either side of this ongoing dispute. My personal opinion is that the conduct of both parties leave a lot to be desired. For example, I don't agree with Diana's "supposedly Objectivist" comments about Mrs. Speicher. It also repulses me that people continue to mention Diana's past involvement with TOC as an argument against her character. In my opinion, both are unjust. This is just one example.

If my participation on an Internet forum means my public sanction of everything which is being posted - then I can not participate on any forums. I have never felt (and still don't) that I have a duty to respond to everything which I disagree with, here or elsewhere. I often don't even read every thread. I have a life outside of the internet world and I want to keep it that way.

When it comes to the issue raised about there being continuous challenges of ideas promoted by contemporary Objectivist intellectuals on THE FORUM (I think it was KendallJ) - there have been challenges of this kind on every Objectivist forum I know, including this one - to a various degree. As everyone here (I think), I highly value being able to openly discuss and evaluate ideas regardless of who originated them - a fact which should not require further explanation.

At the same time, I agree with you, Diana, that some of the comments on THE FORUM have been rather disrespectful. The same ideas could have been debated successfully without using words such as "foolish" (but there have been others) as it is not possible to be evaluating particular person's ideas without it, at the same time, not being a reflection on the person who originated them. I would like to call for a more respectful approach in the future.

But I also don't find your decision, Diana, to involve everyone in this dispute with THE FORUM, your decision to create another division within our already small community as a good solution. I don't see a value in it.

Edited July 19, 2007 by ~Sophia~

[aequalsa]

Aequalsa is one such detractor, and for the time that I've known him on this forum, he's always seemed to be honest and quite sharp. If he says he observed a problem there, I have a hard time just dismissing his opinion.

Likewise, there are I know one or two folks on your forum who I also respect and think to be quite sharp. They say there isn't a problem. Do I believe them or just dismiss them?

Thanks, RB.

I think it possible that no one necessarily need be dismissed as its very possible that we are all telling the truth of our experiences. My post being deleted does not mean that other members could not have gone very long without experiencing the same thing. I was not very active there but in the time that I was a member, I had no other deletions. Notably, on no other occasion had I argued against Mr. Speicher. The coincidence of that was enough for me to end my use of the site.

[RationalBiker]

Moderator Note:

Based on a discussion with other moderators, admins and the site owner, as well as Betsy's acknowledgement above, this thread is being closed for the time being.

Additionally it has been decided to remove the initial comments by Ms. Hsieh that sparked this whole issue. Depending on further review, other comments related to that line of discussion may be removed as well in an attempt to restore the integrity of that thread to the original CD-ROM discussion.

I would ask that everyone who participates here keep in mind that personal attacks are not permissible on this forum.

Thank you.