Mason, Time To Scrap This Forum?

Or at least change it to the "Sports, Music, & Movies Opinions/Trivia Forum"?


I love a good political or historical debate as much as anyone, but these constant new setup requests for more race cards are really slowing the game up, IMO.

Unfortunately I participated in one this weekend. I agree with you Bill and I am out of these pissing contests. Sometimes when I see half truths and outright disinformation I can't resist but I will from now on. eLROY and brad seem to be pushing an agenda but at least brad admits when he's wrong.

I think you will see more threads with just eLROY and Brad. They will be easier to avoid.

I hope so but I doubt it. eLROY is a self proclaimed expert on just about every topic on this forum and will butt in when ever he feels like with post after post even answering his own post if he doesn't get a response.

Well, better eLROY than me is what I say.

It would be shame if this forum was scrapped.


"Unfortunately I participated in one this weekend. "


Why is it unfortunate? You used the power of the internet to discuss an issue highly relevant to "the fabric of our society". What's wrong with that?


"Sometimes when I see half truths and outright disinformation I can't resist but I will from now on."


I didn't read any of your posts where you debunked any half truths or set the record straight about any disinformation. It would be great if you actually did, seriously.


"eLROY and brad seem to be pushing an agenda but at least brad admits when he's wrong."


Pushing an agenda is overstating the case. They are expressing their respective points of view. Do you think this forum should be trashed because they say things you don't agree with? If you don't agree with what they have to say why don't you present a coherent argument to the contrary?

Bill:


I agree with you completely. Chuck Weinstock and I are in agreement that something needs to be done to control the amount of "hate" that is appearing in the posts on this forum. And, if it means that we must eventually shut it down, even though we don't want to do it, we will.


However, we don't want it to come to that and I now ask people like eLroy, Brad, Chris Alger, and Ray Springfield to perhaps voluntarilylimit their participation at www.twoplustwo (http://www.twoplustwo) to all our other forums and stay off this one.


If problems continue, we will permanently bar some posters if necessary, and if that doesn't help we will shut this forum down.


And, as I said in my previous post, I am not bluffing.


Best wishes,

Mason

Mason, I have seen no hate posts from Chris Alger. He has responded to a few posts in the last few days, citing facts and figures, and he made one joke, which had a winking face after it. I think it is wrong to include him with the others you have mentioned.

brad wrote:


"so why do university admissions have lower standards for minorities?


heck, if you wanted to be fair you could just use SATs (which correctly predict how well students will do in college). "


Even brad retreated his statement. I regretted it because eLROY jumped in attributing meanings to my post and then subsequent thay I clearly did make.


I responded to his post:


I think the accuracy in which SAT scores predict how well students do in college is open for debate. It would be useful if you would quote the source of the statistics you have to back this up i.e. what statistics are you using to back this statement up and how do you define success?

The other issue you keep harping on is the racial quotas that universities have. Again please cite your statistical evidence that this is true.

The third issue is that even if what you are saying is true what is the significance of this i.e. what are you trying to say about university admission practices and their revlevance to society and how it functions or how it should function?


To brad’s credit he did take the time to try and back his statement up and when he couldn’t he said so and posted a link which basically stated that his (brad’s) assertation was incorrect.


ELROY then jumps in and posts this in response to my post.


Well of course someone is going to say that whether SAT's predict "success" is "open for debate." And what is pathetic is that actual statistics exists, and success is easily defined, and yet the people who say it is open for debate would debate all day and night, but would never take time out of their busy schedule to track down any such statistics, or define and measure success or failure for black people.

Meaning, the reason it is open for debate is specifically because all people are interested in is selling their own theories, rather than checking the facts. They want to keep it open indefnitely, in the face of undeniable evidence. "Open" or not, I would suggest that the responsible thing for you to do, Mr. Haley, would be to track down these statistics yourself before you even open your mouth again.

For crying out loud, "how do you define success?" Grades, academic standing in their class, whether or not they have failed and dropped out! This isn't that complicated, only obfuscated by people with an agenda who need to dodge the facts. The truth is that SAT's overpredict the success of blacks during their first year in college, because blacks who have no prior experience in the art of getting good grades are admitted to competitive colleges and, as a result, are disproportionately likely to end up as dropouts, whereas they could have succeeded if they were pushed down to a slower-paced college.

But the real problem is revealed in your last sentence where you talk about how society "should function." As with any biological system, there is the way some theoretician says it "should" function, and the way it really does function. The way society "should" function is that everyone should sleep on a bed of roses in a glass castle. The way it does function is that black kids are destroyed by being thrown into an alien environment where grades matter, as sacrifices so that other people can maintain political power.

_________________________________________________

eLROY states that actual statistics exist but where are they (I construe this as disinformation)?


_________________________________________

Then he states:


“Meaning, the reason it is open for debate is specifically because all people are interested in is selling their own theories, rather than checking the facts.”

_________________________________________________

According to eLROY there should no debate because the facts speak for themselves yet he has provided none. This is more disinformation.

_________________________________________________


eLROY then writes:


“But the real problem is revealed in your last sentence where you talk about how society "should function."

________________________________________________


I didn’t make any statement about how society should function I only posed a question to brad because he made his in reference to affirmative action and it’s role in society. It was unclear to me (and still is) what he was driving at in bringing up his view of college admission policies. I would call this a half truth. He, eLROY, implies I made a value judgement by stating the words should function when clearly I did not.


_________________________________________________


He then writes:


“The way society "should" function is that everyone should sleep on a bed of roses in a glass castle.”

_________________________________________________

I asked him to explain this metaphor and he still hasn’t. I honestly don’t understand the meaning.

_________________________________________________


He then writes:


“The way it does function is that black kids are destroyed by being thrown into an alien environment where grades matter, as sacrifices so that other people can maintain political power.”

_________________________________________________


An opinion for sure but he offers nothing to support it. Honestly I would not mind reading his reasoning but I don’t really think he wants to open himself up that much.

________________________________________________


Finally eLROY writes:


"Open" or not, I would suggest that the responsible thing for you to do, Mr. Haley, would be to track down these statistics yourself before you even open your mouth again.

__________________________________________________

I think it’s clear that eLROY didn’t really want to entertain ideas that didn’t fit his perception of how things are by this statement.


Later on in the thread he puts words in my mouth by attributing meaning to what I wrote that I clearly did not make.


In my opinion brad’s original post was off the wall as it’s relevance to the effectiveness of affirmative action was unclear to me. All I tried to do was have him provide a factual basis for his statement and take it from there. I regret because basically eLROY told me to keep quiet if I didn’t agree and brought in a whole lot of things that were totally irrelevant to my original response to brad. BTW I don’t think affirmative action is a right.


I remember an interesting (to me) discussion with an regarding Kalman filters I had with another poster on this forum. eLROY sticks his nose in and starts spewing his take about how predictive filters can be used to predict the stock market. My response to him was that he totally missed the point of my post in that I was wondering how accurately Kalman filters predict future stock market prices as compared to the navigational position of an airplane. My take was that he knew nothing about airline navigation and the role of Kalman filters in their navigation and was just trying to impress people with how much he knew about trading. I have my doubts as to whether he knows anything about Kalman filters but that isn't the point. Why not tell me how accurate Kalman filters are in predicting the market? It's typical for him.

Guy throws a punch at another guy, Mason throws both of them out. It's called 'balance' and we are going to get more of it very soon.

for those that dont like what they are seeing they shoudnt open posts by those that are offensive to them. and those that complain, maybe dont answer some posts that are flaming, this way you wont get wraped up in it.

and those that insist on going over the line of decency you are going to ruin it for everyone plus get barred.

What makes you connect Bill Murphy's complaint about "race cards" with anything I've said? I didn't start these brad and Elroy threads and have barely participated in them. I don't even read them because they don't make any sense and aren't serious. I don't like this junk any more than Bill, or Tom or you. Suggesting that I'm somehow responsible for them (a suggestion that appears to have originated from Ray Springfield's "see what Alger started" complaint to you below) is simply unfair.


Below you indicated that I must refrain from responding to Springfield unprovoked personal attacks on me or I will be barred from participating. I agreed to do this. Now you're saying that I should "voluntarily" "stay off" this forum altogether, regardless of what I say about anything.


What's really going on?

We are not prepared nor do we have the capability to do a good job moderating these types of poosts. If something isn't done, I believe they will not only ruin this forum but will spill over into our other forums and ruin them as well.


We started the Two Plus Two site in 1996, and we never dreamed that it would be this successful, and get the type and amount of high quality posts that we have seen and that we continue to get. I believe that it is very important to protect that for the good of everyone who participates here.


If that means that strong action is required, then that will be the course we will follow. And, if the course of action is not 100 percent fair to everyone, then that is of course unfortunate, but probably still necessary.


So here's what I now suggest, and I may change my mind in the near future. Why don't you (Chris Alger), Ray Springfield, eLroy, Brad, and anyone else who feels strongly about these issues and who is contributing to driving this forum into oblivion not post here (that is The Other Topics Forum) until Thursday. That will give us a cooling off period, and then perhaps we can return to vigorous debate without all the hate and nastiness.


But let me say this again, and this is especially aimed at you Ray Springfield. If your attacks don't stop you will be barred, and if necessary this forum will be closed down.


For the rest of you, Ray Zee has some excellent advice in his post below. We'll need everyone to help, and it will be much appreciated.

Andy,


I agree completely.


John