Discussion on Ron Maimon's alleged bad character

Question

Because the "specific user" requested for the attack against him to stay (and nobody knows why).

Comments

Don't say "in anticipation of April Fool's day", it's not April 1st, and this was not a joke. It is a legitimate point of view, and the majority point of view on several sites.

Answer 1

LOL of course now it is getting downplayed as an April fools day joke. Reminds me of how Fox News in the US handles unconvincing truths. Nice technique for spreading propaganda. Putting it into a different absurd context to downplay it. But on the other hand, this post gives my answer more attention and it doesn't help Ron at all, and there will be trouble again in the future, that's for sure. So thx for that. Also you can just delete everything and ban me, that would be the easiest solution. Why don't you try it? It's just a few clicks ;)

BTW: Did the topics on how to handle the site exceed the topics on physics yet?

Comments

You will never be banned unless you start repeating yourself or spamming, and you might be right. Obviously you were not joking, I recognized some truth in your criticism. I might be a terrible problem in the future, because of personality defects. But in the recent past, I am sure I was a postive influence, because we have freedom of speech now, for you to criticise me.

Answer 2

@WolfInSheepSkin It's all in the past. Arnold got Ron repented and put him on the right road.

(In fact, the worst person here is I.)

Comments

@VladimirKalitviansy: Arnold isn't against you, he is very thoughtful in responding to your text. I haven't stopped defending your scientific material from censorship, if you haven't noticed. I repented of my awful review of Dynin, and of the crazy idea that propaganda would ever be necessary at all on this site, that's all. But it's still not banned by blocks, it's just extremely discouraged. It's not like WolfInSheepSkin is going to get blocked, or even this comment hidden, although it might get moved, knowing dimension10 (I don't think it should be moved, it makes me happy).

---

Arnold isn't against you, he is very thoughtful in responding to your text.

I did not notice this. Normally he does not respond to my "texts", to my requests to explain why he has written such things in his reviews, as if I never asked that. The same do Dilaton and dimension10: they do not reply to my questions/requests.

---

They don't have anything new to say. You can't expect people to respond, just not to censor you.

---

Right, they have nothing to say.

Answer 3

I think we indeed concentrated on secondary things. The primary thing for the site to flourish is votes. I propose to reconsider all downvotes in favor of upvotes. Together with rudeness, grammar, and spelling editions, this will significantly improve the PO image.

Answer 4

I think, that Ron Maimon should do more work on the Wikisource bible & stop insulting people who disagree with him.

Answer 5

The problem is that there are people who are worshipping Ron Maimon. Even the purpose of this site was to give Maimon a plattform where he could insult people further, not exactly, but the creators of this site had him in mind, just look at early comments from those people and look at the motiviations to start this site. I actually think you should get rid of Ron Maimon because he poisons everything with his psychopathic personality. There isn't much to lose anyway. If I may cite him:

Cursing abusiveness is the most effective propaganda technique, it works to change weak minds, and it helps your cause.

Ron Maimon

You can find it on the internet. But of course it is difficult to argue with him because he is the most arrogant and ignorant person an the internet and he always replies with a HUGE wall of text which reminds me of a kind of Gish gallop, which is certainly true. The only thing that would improve the site is an indefinite banning of Ron Maimon .

Comments

Ok, that's a perspective, thanks for sharing. But I downvoted it, because I like myself. I stand by what I said in your quote: cursing rudeness is an effective propaganda technique, as is character smears, and out-of-context quoting, like the above. This is why it really does not belong in scientific discussions, because propaganda distracts from the scientific content. With scientific training, the propaganda value of cursing drops to zero, which means whichever way, with or without cursing, the technical content stays the same.

That doesn't mean I don't say rude things on youtube, because there is a lot of propaganda there. I tend to get rude when there is argument from authority, or I see a busted authoritative consensus which is repeated. It will get edited away here and it is empty of scientific content, and it really can't matter for a scientifically literate audience, except to make them think the rude person is an idiot.

As for walls of text and psychopathology, I can't help it. I've been doing this internet thing for a while.

---

I disagree that Ron is a psychopath since he's open and honest about who he is. Ron is... "a dick" sometimes ;) Out of curiosity, are you John Archer that sometimes comments on Lubos's site?

---

No, I'm not John Archer, who is another mentally challenged guy from Lubo's blog.