ATTN NovaMarsollia

Adrian · 2002-09-22 04:15:02

This is a copy of a post I sent to NovaMarsollia. If you would like to check up which of his posts have already been made to Usenet (most several years ago), simply go to http://groups.google.com, copy and paste a short section of text and put quotation marks on either side (" marks). They tend to be the more superficially cogent posts.

Hi,

You may have seen some of the complaints about your posting habits; I tend to agree with them in some respects. This is a discussion board, not a essay board. People post things here with the intent for them to be discussed, and frankly, I don't think that you share that intent. Your debating technique notwithstanding, I think you know as well as I do that your posts aren't being productive for discussion at all - your posts are akin to a Greenpeace member visiting an fossil fuels discussion board, that is, reactionary and without compromise.

Moreover, I do not want you to keep on reposting messages from Usenet. I don't care whether you wrote them yourself in the first place, and I hope you didn't expect people not to notice. Google is a wonderful thing these days.

If you want to continue writing about why you think Mars is bad, etc, then feel free to do so *on your own website*. There are plenty of places you can do this for free, on Geocities or Blogspot.

I am asking you to tone down the quantity of your posting, stop reposting old posts, and consider what you are writing. If you don't, I'll have to consider more severe measures.

If you repost anything from the web or Usenet again, I'll delete it.

Adrian Hon
New Mars Editor

NovaMarsollia · 2002-09-22 05:47:12

Now you have made known to everyone you are a big moan-arse Adrian. No one else seems to be complaining, and this board has needed a pep-up, you know that.

I guess when you become dictator of Mars you'll do your best to censure dissenting opinion there too. Fortunately, some other people here don't mind reading a little intelligent dissent. So Shuddupya face! (Awww severe measure---I'm so scared!)

Adrian · 2002-09-22 07:20:35

I have already asked you once, politely, to stop reposting material from Usenet and to cut down on your non-discussion. Sci.space.policy clearly had its fill of you, and so have I. I'm more than willing to ban you from these forums if you give me another good reason; I administrate New Mars in my spare time and I don't want to waste it on you. Incidentally, I happen to think that ad hominem arguments are the sign of a bad debater.

Adrian · 2002-09-22 09:08:46

I've had enough. You're banned.

Josh Cryer · 2002-09-22 15:49:10

Thank you Adrian. Your actions are perfectly reasonable. It's not like he was posting in already started threads, decimating current arguments in a civilized manner. No, he was posting thread after thread of pointless essays.

Don't get me wrong, though. If he was being civilized, I would be complaining about his banning. I don't mind divergent opinions (hey, there are a lot of those here- me especially). I do mind spam, however.

Thanks.

Adrian · 2002-09-23 08:44:19

In the absence of any kind of written forum policy on behaviour and banning, and the fact that I don't intend to write one any time soon, here are my thoughts:

I really don't like banning people, and I really don't like deleting messages. These actions are by definition the last resort that I can take, and so I will only use them when other possibilities have been exhausted and the person in question is consistently trolling.

If someone is trolling, I will warn them twice and ask them to stop. If they show that they are stopping and showing some signs of regret, then that's probably fine. In Nova's case, he completely ignored both warnings and continued trolling and insulting people - his level of trolling was such that it was derailing entire threads, and if he was left alone he'd disrupt more.

I don't think anyone here, myself included, minds divergent opinions. Occasionally we might get annoyed but I would never consider banning anyone simply because they are presenting a divergent opinion.

clark · 2002-09-23 09:12:34

Might I suggest an alternative to banning or even deletion of posts?

Create a section on the board for "troll" posts or topics.

Not deletion, merely banishment.

Censorship is tantamount to intellectual capital punishment- while it does have it's place, it's place should be seldom used. At least you demonstrate this enlightenment Adrian.

Maybe call it "Outside the airlock"

Josh Cryer · 2002-09-23 12:00:21

Actually, that's a fine idea. I do wish other forums I go to had a sort of ?Garbage Bin.? This way, people can go to the ?Garbage Bin,? and see what kind of behavior is unreasonable and warrents banning. This isn't about censorship, this is about civility.

I think banning is reasonable punishment for spamming and relentless trolling.

Palomar · 2002-09-23 16:13:46

This isn't about censorship, this is about civility.
I think banning is reasonable punishment for spamming and relentless trolling.

*Trolls have a nasty tendency to "breed," and quickly. I know of one public newsgroup that is so infested with trolls, most of whom are posting via xganon (anonymous), that even the former Kings and Queens of Flaming are fed up and questioning whether Google should just shut the NG down permanently.

As regards censorship, everyone does it in some form or another. Whenever someone tells another person in a moment of anger "shut up!", that's a form of censorship or at least desiring to censor.

I formerly had a member of my mailing list being civil and polite at the mailing list...and then I caught her maligning me, making false accusations and spreading lies about me at a public newsgroup -- while she was still a member of my mailing list! I don't know this woman personally, and had only a passing familiarity with her at a newsgroup for quite a few months. She can post whatever she wants to about me at the public newsgroup (I did make one reply post to this newsgroup, defending myself and exposing her), but I did unsubscribe her from my mailing list. Was my unsubscribing her from my mailing list "censorship"? If it was, so be it. I'm not a cheek-turning fool to allow this lunatic the benefits of my mailing list (which I work hard on) AND ignore/tolerate her trashing my name and reputation at a public forum...especially not when this woman is now posting threats of shooting people who contradict her at various newsgroups, and who also threatens to have her SEVEN-YEAR-OLD GRANDCHILD shoot her "enemies." I do NOT want this woman in my life, in whatever form, not even daily contact via mailing list posts. I have the right to protect myself and my mailing list.

Not allowing Jehovah's Witnesses or Mormons to keep you at your front door for however long it takes them to complete their proselytizing is a form of censorship.

Everyone does it [censorship] in some form or another; otherwise, we'd be placing ourselves at the utter mercy of any and every peddler, preacher, or fruitcake that comes along; we'd be constantly answering the phone, standing at the door, etc.

Everyone's got the right to be heard, and everyone has the right to filter what they consider to be crap, out.

Reminds me: An art student at University of Texas at El Paso a few years ago attempted to sue a local art store for refusing to buy his paintings and sculptures. According to this dingbat, anyone NOT wanting to buy his paintings and sculptures was censoring him. By that goofball's "logic," I guess that means I'm censoring beer all the time (yucky beer, doesn't taste good)!

Any adult who says they have never felt the desire to shut another person up [censoring] is a liar.

I think Adrian did the right thing. Moderators/owners of lists, message boards, what-have-you have their reputation to keep in consideration (well, at least the smart ones do <wink>), and I think Adrian is like me in this regard: Quality over quantity. These message boards are his "baby," and it's his right to ensure a certain standard is maintained. You're doing an excellent job, Adrian.

If anyone thinks NovaMarsollias is being picked on or otherwise unfairly treated, by all means start your own message boards or mailing list, and invite him to join in. For that matter, he can start his own. The latter would be more ideal for him, as he could then ensure he's not dealing with "dreamers" and "children"...although one must wonder why he didn't have the brains to remove himself from the seemingly irksome company of "dreamers" and "children" to begin with.

It's a big cyberworld out there. Carve your own niche if you have to.

--Cindy

"The world is full of creeps and sh*t disturbers. Steer clear of sh*t disturbers." -- Lavey

Adrian · 2002-09-23 16:28:00

I don't really see the point of creating a 'garbage bin' forum based on what the New Mars forums are supposed to be for. These forums are not here to imitate some kind of ideal society, they're here to discuss Mars and related issues. I've made it clear to people that spam and trolling is unwelcome - I see no need to cater for them. Trollers can knock themselves out at Geocities and Blogspot and publish their own material without any so-called 'censorship' from me.

I can see why having an example of what constitutes spam and trolling might be useful, but that doesn't mean there should be a forum dedicated to it; I can just as easily copy and paste a couple of posts which would have the same effect, and save me a bit of hassle and bandwidth. Only yesterday I had to ban and delete the messages of a spammer here - why should there be a forum in which people can post random spam? It's not as if anyone here is going to read it, or doesn't receive enough spam via email. Ditto for a dedicated trolling forum.

The 'Intelligent Alien Life' forum is different - clearly it *is* related to Mars. I don't see it as a garbage bin or anything though - I made the forum so that people who don't want to discuss such issues can avoid them (and there are many such people), while not prohibiting discussion.

A.J.Armitage · 2002-09-23 18:17:13

I think you did the right thing. If people get to be a big enough pain in the ass, they should be banned for the good of the forum. He went beyond the usual nuttiness by posting such massive amounts of spam.

A.J.Armitage · 2002-09-23 18:19:41

Clark;

Intellectual capital punishment would be a lobotomy. Nova just isn't allowed to post here anymore. He can go elsewhere, if they'll have him, or start his own site.

Shaun Barrett · 2002-09-23 18:20:46

For what it's worth, Adrian, you have my full support also. I very much enjoy the opportunity this site provides to exchange thoughts with like-minded (and not-so-like-minded) people.
In my opinion, we all owe you a vote of thanks for your efforts, and I see no reason to question your obviously fair-minded motives and methods.

Palomar · 2002-09-23 19:23:36

Clark;
Intellectual capital punishment would be a lobotomy.

*LOL! You are right, A.J. Yes, a lobotomy would be intellectual capital punishment; excellent response, bravo! I wish I'd come up with that one...

--Cindy

Josh Cryer · 2002-09-23 20:28:12

Heh, Cindy, I don't think anyone here is defending Nova. I think clark was just suggesting doing the ?Outside the airlock? thing so that people like Nova can't complain, and any question as to whether or not censorship is happening is eradicated. I certainly don't care either way, I was just agreeing that it could be a good idea.

In the end I do respect that this is Adrian's (and the Mars Society's) forum, so it really doesn't matter to me how things are done.

As long as all these bastards that come here and dissrupt are killed.

Palomar · 2002-09-24 07:59:19

Heh, Cindy, I don't think anyone here is defending Nova. I think clark was just suggesting doing the ?Outside the airlock? thing so that people like Nova can't complain, and any question as to whether or not censorship is happening is eradicated. I certainly don't care either way, I was just agreeing that it could be a good idea.
In the end I do respect that this is Adrian's (and the Mars Society's) forum, so it really doesn't matter to me how things are done.
As long as all these bastards that come here and dissrupt are killed.

*Josh, I hope you didn't think I was targeting you in my response. I quoted you in my post because my own thoughts followed what you were saying in the quote.

I do, however, disagree with Clark's assertion that banning a person from a forum is tantamount to "intellectual capital punishment." I used my own mailing list as an example. I can also relate it to the privacy and sanctity of one's home. There's freedom of speech and expression, but no one with half a brain would allow just anyone to come into their home and do or say whatever they please. No one with any sense whatsoever would allow, or continue to tolerate, someone waltzing into their home and destroying property, insulting and badgering their family, etc. -- someone like that would be shown the door, *pronto*, and probably by the scuff of the neck and a kick to the backside. I regard the internet in the same light, including (of course) my mailing list: I don't allow just anyone into my home, and I also refuse to allow just anyone into my life via the computer as well.

--Cindy

clark · 2002-09-24 08:50:07

I do, however, disagree with Clark's assertion that banning a person from a forum is tantamount to "intellectual capital punishment." I used my own mailing list as an example.

I understand your point. I understand where Adrian is coming from. However, I find fault with this idea of expecting or even demanding the same type of behavior in a public forum created for the express reason to exchange ideas and our own private home.

There is a reasonable expectation that if you are inviting someone into your home, you know them, and they you. The relationship exsists between the person who wons the house, and each individual to the home owner. If I say something to upset Josh in your house Cindy, but it does not upset you, I would more than likely be allowed to stay. However, if I say something that upsets you, but not Josh, I would more than likely be asked to leave. The relationship, and the expectations for conduct exsist between the provider of the house, and each individual.

None of this is true with this forum. Yes Adrian created this, and runs it, so in a sense it is his house. However, it is a house where we each as individuals are given free reign to come and go as we please, and discuss what we choose at our leisure. The relationships exsist between all the memebers- the community.

We have a community here of people who discuss mars and mars colonization. People in this community have different opinoins on everything- the entire range is represented. As such, how can anyone of us legitametly say what should or shouldn't be discussed? I think you're off on legalizing the right to kill yourself- and there is only a dubious relationship or value to "mars colonization"- should that discussion and dialogue be booted as well? 18th century phlisophy may hold some interesting insights, but again, does it relate to "mars colonization"?

Marsnovilla posted some garbage, yet in some of that garbage are valid points that can be addressed. Yes, he believes that Mars should be left alone (or at least brandishes that argument)- but then again, I have argued the same thing in one way or another if you look at my posts in an entirity- many of them show the problems inherent in space colonization- I have often been accused of trying to undermine the pursuit- of being negative, "so just go somewhere else.."

I am not suggesting that all posts be allowed, or that even Novamarsilla in particular should be spared any punishments. I am simply arguing against censorship as much as possible.

Ideas are not bad. Discussions are not bad. All of us are free to READ at our leisure- we can skip Novamars- we are not forced to listen. So Nova thinks mars is a bad idea, so what. My god, if colonization is ever going to happen, there will have to be a decision to face the critical questions, and the inflamatory rhetoric.

My idea for a "garbage bin" is to allow Adrian an opportunity to go "half-way"- it means that if there are a few others in the commmunity who would like to read, or even discuss the "troll" remarks, they have that opportunity. By banning or deleting posts, Adrian is in effect deciding for all of us what we should or shouldn't be discussing, or how we should discuss it.

Sometimes those judgment calls have to be made, and I applaude Adrian for his apprehensive use of banning or deletion (after all I haven't been marked yet ).

That being said, repeated ad-hominem attacks should be barred since personal insults hardly ever qualify as "discussion".

Palomar · 2002-09-24 10:52:19

Clark: I think you're off on legalizing the right to kill yourself- and there is only a dubious relationship or value to "mars colonization"- should that discussion and dialogue be booted as well?

*It should be if I'm using that topic to deliberately attempt to provoke, antagonize, badger and bait others, using it as a channel whereby to engage in ad homien attacks, insult persons by their nation of origin, etc. That was Nova's only ::motive:: for participating here, so far as I could tell. I actually thought it rather humorous when he referred to the U.S.A. as "Imperialists" and "racists"...I rather suspect that's what the Australian Aborigines would label white Australians of European origin.

Clark: 18th century phlisophy may hold some interesting insights, but again, does it relate to "mars colonization"?

*My posts regarding Enlightenment-era philosophy are, of course, housed in the "Free Chat" area, which Adrian has designated as being for "discussion about anything and everything," so there's no conflict of interest there. Besides, I do think just about anyone can benefit from the works of the thinkers of that time, which still impact the world today...even via disagreement with same.

--Cindy

clark · 2002-09-24 11:08:33

*It should be if I'm using that topic to deliberately attempt to provoke and antagonize others,

Since when is provacation a bad thing? Many of my posts tend to "provoke" others, yourself included. Many of my posts can be considered to be antagnoistc, if someone so chose to view them in such a way. How exactly do you establish that a post, or a poster themself is being antagnostic? Ad-hominem attacks I am sure would be a good indication, but not everything Novamarsilla posted was personal insults- some were simply: humans to mars=bad. It all comes down to judgement calls.... which comes down to what Adrian thinks.

So far, i believe Adrian has acted in a a judicous manner, but there may be those who disagree.

Adrian · 2002-09-24 11:09:37

As I've said before, when you look at New Mars, you're looking a benevolent dictatorship. Since I am the only person who has the ability to delete posts and ban members, Clark is right when he says that I'm deciding for everyone what they can read here; I don't pretend that this place operates by democracy.

However, I hope I've earned people's trust here so they know that I won't abuse the authority I have here, and if people don't like it then they are free to join or start up other Mars discussion boards.

Nova posted *some* messages worthy of discussion, I'll admit that, but most of those were copied from old Usenet postings, and pretty much everything else was trolling. Perhaps there are people here who might want to discuss troll posts, but that isn't the kind of discussion I want to foster here and so I'm not going to make any accommodation for that. Almost everything else is fine.

The 'Free Chat' forum is indeed a place for completely off-topic discussion and in my experience, such a forum is practically necessary in any specialised discussion board; people will naturally get to know other posters and want to talk about things other than Mars. 'Free Chat' still has the same basic rules as every other forum here - I expect a basic level of civility, and no ad hominem attacks.

Palomar · 2002-09-24 11:28:51

Clark: Since when is provacation a bad thing?

*It depends on the motive.

If used as a prompting device to try and get another person to see something from a different viewpoint, angle, whatever, it can be a good and productive thing [creative]. However, when it seeks only to hurt, deride, and get "a rise" of anger out of others, that's when it's negative and counterproductive [destructive].

--Cindy

clark · 2002-09-24 13:46:49

I understand your point. However, i fail to understand why people allow others from the internet to get under their skin based on personal insults.

Who CAN'T see a personal insult for what it is? Anyone can be a crank in a basement or a loon in a mental ward with an hour to kill. The point is that you shouldn't care- take it as flattery, I do. Here you have another human being (or at least a well read monkey) taking the time to interact with you.

Is there anything more pathetic than someone who stops their life only to degrade you?

So personal attacks establsih that the person is pathetic to begin with- why get upset over them? Why spend the emotional currency? What?! Can't stand the thought of someone getting away with an attack on your Screen Name? Please, get over it. If you react then you empower the offender- you allow them to dictate your emotional state- why give someone else that?

Reply with love and kindness... be their friend...it works.

Bill White · 2002-09-24 15:34:02

As I've said before, when you look at New Mars, you're looking a benevolent dictatorship.

Plato wrote that justice will come to cities when ". . . philosophers become kings or kings genuinely and adequately philosophize. . ."

I am content that Adrian qualifies on both counts, especially since he has shown genuine reluctance to exercise power.

Besides, if NovaMarsollia wants to return and play nice, he can open a new account under another name. Provided this new account does not flame or spam or troll, I have no problem with that. Thus, NO death penalty. However, if the same Usenet material is again posted, or if it appears obvious the alternate account is merely to spread abuse, I say delete *without* prior warning.

By the way, at the Kiro5hin website, there are several people who routinely post from their alternate account. Often quite funny, also.

clark · 2002-09-24 15:51:54

All hail Ceasr.

Maybe "Super Administrator" should be changed to "well meaning despot".

Palomar · 2002-09-24 16:38:08

I understand your point. However, i fail to understand why people allow others from the internet to get under their skin based on personal insults.
Who CAN'T see a personal insult for what it is? Anyone can be a crank in a basement or a loon in a mental ward with an hour to kill. The point is that you shouldn't care- take it as flattery, I do. Here you have another human being (or at least a well read monkey) taking the time to interact with you.
Is there anything more pathetic than someone who stops their life only to degrade you?
So personal attacks establsih that the person is pathetic to begin with- why get upset over them? Why spend the emotional currency? What?! Can't stand the thought of someone getting away with an attack on your Screen Name? Please, get over it. If you react then you empower the offender- you allow them to dictate your emotional state- why give someone else that?
Reply with love and kindness... be their friend...it works.

*Clark, I'm not interested in debating this; you're making comments based on very little information, and frankly I find your intended stance on this issue foolhardy. This isn't just about "someone getting under another person's skin via the internet." This is about a woman who has a documented legal history of assaulting people, threatening them with violence [and sometimes carrying out these threats], etc. If she gets the street address and telephone number of a supposed "enemy," she'll harrass that person -- she's done it dozens of times to other people, as I found out too late, unfortunately.

You asked, "Is there anything more pathetic than someone who stops their life only to degrade you?" I'll answer: Nope. And it'd take an even more pathetic person to wish to remain friends with a person like that.

As for replying with "love and kindness" -- sorry, I'm not Jesus. I'm simply not replying to/interacting with her again, and my husband seconds me on this. I've seen documented posts on Google of people who tried to be nice to her, tried to reason with her, tried to rekindle a friendship -- they just get burned by her again. "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." My husband and I are handling the situation just fine, but thanks for your input.

--Cindy

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2002-09-22 04:15:02

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#2 2002-09-22 05:47:12

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#3 2002-09-22 07:20:35

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#4 2002-09-22 09:08:46

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#5 2002-09-22 15:49:10

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#6 2002-09-23 08:44:19

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#7 2002-09-23 09:12:34

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#8 2002-09-23 12:00:21

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#9 2002-09-23 16:13:46

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#10 2002-09-23 16:28:00

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#11 2002-09-23 18:17:13

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#12 2002-09-23 18:19:41

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#13 2002-09-23 18:20:46

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#14 2002-09-23 19:23:36

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#15 2002-09-23 20:28:12

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#16 2002-09-24 07:59:19

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#17 2002-09-24 08:50:07

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#18 2002-09-24 10:52:19

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#19 2002-09-24 11:08:33

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#20 2002-09-24 11:09:37

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#21 2002-09-24 11:28:51

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#22 2002-09-24 13:46:49

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#23 2002-09-24 15:34:02

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#24 2002-09-24 15:51:54

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

#25 2002-09-24 16:38:08

Re: ATTN NovaMarsollia

Board footer