Discussion re the end of the RDF (as we knew it)

[Praxis]

This thread is for people to discuss, if they wish, the demise of a giant amongst atheist forums, the Richard Dawkins forum.

There is only one rule for this thread and that is there are to be no personal insults. Posts of that nature will be removed.

It's obviously a complex matter but there are many people who are now without a forum home and who will want and need a place to talk about it.

As of today, the forum as it was known and (mostly) loved, closed its doors without warning. Even the Moderating team were unaware. An announcement was put up by Admin, which I have pasted below, and that's all anyone knew about it.

Members have been allowed to send one PM only (luckily I chose Durro, my mate and a (now former) RDF Mod to find out what was going on). He emailed me fairly quickly to advise.


Here is the announcement:
Update:We had intended to leave the forum fully-funtioning for 30 days, but due to the inappropriate posts by some users and moderators, we have decided to leave the forum in a read-only state. You can still download and archive your posts and private messages, but the ability to enter new posts has been disabled. It's unfortunate that it had to come to this. We know that change can be difficult and sometimes frightening, but we are all very excited about the direction of the website and the future.

------------------------------------

Dear forum members,

We wanted you all to know at the earliest opportunity about our new website currently in development. RichardDawkins.net will have a new look and feel, improved security, and much more. Visits to the site have really grown over the past 3 1/2 years, and this update gives us an opportunity to address several issues. Over the years we've become one of the world's leading resources for breaking rational and scientific news and original content. We are focusing on quality content distribution, and will be bringing more original articles, video and other content as we grow.

The new RichardDawkins.net will have a fully-integrated discussion section. This will be a new feature for the site, similar to the current forum, but not identical. We feel the new system will be much cleaner and easier to use, and hopefully this will encourage participation from a wider variety of users.

We will leave the current forum up for 30 days, giving regular users an opportunity to locally archive any content they value. When the new website goes live, you are welcome to submit these posts as new discussions. The forum will then be taken down from the web. You will not loose your username on the new system.

The new discussion area will not be a new forum. It will be different. We will be using a system of tags to categorize items, instead of sub-forums. Discussions can have multiple tags, such as "Education", "Children", and "Critical Thinking". Starting a new discussion will require approval, so we ask that you only submit new discussions that are truly relevant to reason and science. Subsequent responses on the thread will not need approval—however anything off topic or violating the new terms of service will be removed. The approval process will be there to ensure the quality of posts on the site. This is purely an editorial exercise to help new visitors find quality content quickly. We hope this discussion area will reflect the foundation's goals and values.

We know that this is a big decision. We know some of you will be against this change. We ask that you respect our decision and help make this transition as smooth as possible.

We're confident that these changes will improve the site experience and we look forward to seeing what you do with the new system.

Many thanks again.

Josh Timonen,
Andrew Chalkley
The Richard Dawkins Foundation

I joined the RDF forum quite a few years ago, when it was only just over 12 months old. The place was instrumental in teaching me an enormous amount - everything from true critical thinking to how to spot a logical fallacy, what is Poe's law, Occam's Razor, a straw man, etc. The RDF gave me the tools to construct a decent argument against theists. I received support and encouragment from some fine minds and made some very good friends. I had some of the best online laughs I've ever had and occasionally cried as people who had become dear shared life circumstances.

The forum weathered schisms and splits, splinter groups and trolls, but overall the mood of the place always seemed quite upbeat with the shared aim of learning and exchanging information whilst having fun.

It now appears that perhaps too much fun was being had and the plug has been pulled in what would seem an overly hasty and quite unethical manner.

The Mod Team consisted of some very fine people, several of whom I know quite well and consider friends, others of whom I don't know so well but have always admired. I think they have been treated very badly indeed.

The timing is pretty lousy too - with Professor Dawkins headlining the GAC - the RDF had a large, loud and ebullient Australian community, a great many of whom are coming to the GAC. They will not be happy at having their online home unilaterally torn down as it has been.

Anyway, enough from me. Please give us your thoughts if you are (sorry, were) a member of RDF.

If you are just an interested onlooker, I would ask that you please be respectful (weird as it may sound). A lot of us invested a lot of time and energy into the RDF over the years and what has happened feels not unlike a little death. I myself am feeling a weird mixture of shock and something very close to grief today.

So be nice.

Thank you.

[Praxis]

I have permission from Durro to post this here. This is his email response to mine and another friend's WTF? query about what was going on:

I didn't find out that anything was up till this morning, when I stumbled over the Admin announcement from Josh.

The mods were promised consultation and cooperation by Andrew (Chalkers, the tech weenie) and Andrew (The Admin Dude), and the opportunity to test out a new site and work out the bugs before any transition. We were told that the current forums would be migrated over, but perhaps reorganised with more emphasis on science.

They've gone ahead and completely excluded the Mods, presented a fair accompli with a new format, and now we're locked out of RD.net like everyone else. For 40 mins after the lock, the Mods were still able to post, but now we're shut out too, probably because we all went berserk and Josh didn't want to deal with us.

The Mods started an off-site forum several weeks ago and the shit is flying thick and fast in that at the moment. I'm yet to catch up with it, as I'm at work and fairly busy.

I'll keep you updated as things come to hand.

So that gives you some idea of what has gone on behind the scenes.

Not good :confused:

[riddlemethis]

Hey Praxis. Thanks for starting this thread. So far as I know I am the only refugee who's made it this far & even then, I was already a (largely absent) member.

Like you, the RDF forums were a critical thinking awakening for me. Until I joined (not long after your good self Prax, I think) shaking my head at the piles of bullshit around me was a solitary pass-time. I knew things didn't add up, but I couldn't really tell you why. At RDF I learned the language to explain my frustration with what I saw around me, as well as how to use that language to measure a decent argument. The journey has seen me rekindle my love of life sciences & return to University study.

I met Praxis. And that means the world to me.

Explaining the sense of shell-shock I have about the way these changes to RDF have been handled is difficult. I think of people I admire enormously, like Durro & other's whose names won't mean much here, and the time they gave out of their RL's to assist the 24/7 operation of the community which grew out of not only our shared atheism but also for the most part a deep admiration for Richard's work, especially as an evolutionary biologist. For him to send in his Administrator & Chief Propeller-Head to handle the communication of his plans, a person whose appalling disregard & interpersonal skills have been demonstrated before, is nothing short of callous & completely cowardly. I wonder what he thinks of his reasoning now, or whether we are all just faceless muppets to him.

I don't disregard Richards right to do what he sees fit with his own brand, nor to align himself with activities which he thinks best suit the purposes of his foundation. But I am shocked at his lack of empathy for a large group of people (RDF had 85,000 registered members) who'd come together because of his mission.

Personally, he will be seeing my back when he takes the stage & accepts applause in Melbourne, as a form of protest. I would like him to know that people take it very seriously when they are treated as though they are faceless drones who do not matter. I hope that other RDF'ers will join me in this.

So, sadly for you folk, you'll be seeing a bit more of me - I'm a serial forum monogamist dontchya know! - and it looks like Prax needs lots of help bringing you guys up to speed on your Stralyan Cultcha.

[Praxis]

Thanks love *hug*

Vikki's here - she's lurking online and I expect Durro and Starr to put in an appearance.

Hey, we might get Goldenmane! Oh hang on ... :p

Meanwhile, will be lovely to see you around here more, so there's the silver lining :D

[AndreD]

Was just told about this place by riddlemethis after the evisceration of the RD forums.
So I suppose I'll just say 'Hi!' for now, and ask you not to hold her responsible for any potentially contrary posts I may make. :p ;)

[davo]

Was just told about this place by riddlemethis after the evisceration of the RD forums.
So I suppose I'll just say 'Hi!' for now, and ask you not to hold her responsible for any potentially contrary posts I may make. :p ;)

Did someone see an ark grounded somewhere near here?

;) Welcome to the forum AndreD

[Praxis]

Was just told about this place by riddlemethis after the evisceration of the RD forums.
So I suppose I'll just say 'Hi!' for now, and ask you not to hold her responsible for any potentially contrary posts I may make. :p ;)
... and you would be? :) (ie would I know you by another name?)

Welcome anyway!

PS: I hold my dear riddlemethis responsible for many things, but not other people's posts ;)

[kazzaqld]

I think RDF was the first atheist forum I joined and now I'm all over the place.:o

I hadn't been back in a while, but I did like checking it out from time to time. Often very interesting discussions and useful content.

It will definitely be missed. :(

Welcome to any RDFers who make their way here. :D

[nari]

I have visited only a few times as an observer and still I feel very sad at its demise. I can understand the flack they had to put up with, but couldn't they (admin) simply ban the weirdos???
It's a backward move and I regret it sincerely.

nari

[AndreD]

... and you would be? :) (ie would I know you by another name?)

Welcome anyway!

PS: I hold my dear riddlemethis responsible for many things, but not other people's posts ;)

I've used this name since I joined RD.net in 2007, but I didn't really post outside of the Politics forum to any significant degree, so we may have never come across each other. Did you go by another name over there?

[Loki]

Welcome refugees. I had become a regular lurker at RDF, couldn't bring myself to get involved (despite being sorely tempted a couple of times), no life as it is. The loss of such a fantastic resource library is a shock, not to mention the community which built it.

[Sir Patrick Crocodile]

Can a reptillian guest pay his respects over here? I wasn't a member of RDF but I used to be a not-so-regular guest over there at the occasional time. It was a very interesting forum. And may this thread be a tribute to it. It gave me a shock to find out that it had left the building.

[Praxis]

Can a reptillian guest pay his respects over here? I wasn't a member of RDF but I used to be a not-so-regular guest over there at the occasional time. It was a very interesting forum. And may this thread be a tribute to it. It gave me a shock to find out that it had left the building.
You may indeed pay your respects here Croc. Thank you. It's a sad day and many people are very bummed out indeed.

Yep, it's left the building. It's passed on, the forum is no more. It has ceased to be. It's expired and gone to meet its maker. It's a stiff! Bereft of life, it rests in peace. Its metabolic processes are now history. It's off the twig! It's kicked the bucket, it's shuffled off this mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!! THIS IS AN EX-FORUM!

er, sorry about that ... got a bit carried away there :o

[wolty]

I never visited the forum (loved the site) so condolences to everyone (esp Praxis) for the loss. Sounds to me like losing a relative. And then fighting over the will.

Hopefully everyone can move forward and good things will happen in the future.

Welcome to everyone that comes here via rdf.

[Durro]

Hi Guys,

As some of you know, I was - until this morning - one of the Moderators on the Richard Dawkins discussion forum, a forum with some 85,000 members of which some 20,000 were regularly active. We'd have up to 1000 members on-line at once and I believe recently became the #1 atheist forum on the internet in terms of traffic and membership numbers.

The forum was experiencing technical difficulties over the past several months because of high traffic volumes and limitations with the server's bandwidth and access to archived posts. The search function was disabled to try and cut down on database stress, but the system became more and more glitchy, with the dreaded "general error" message interfering with posts and Moderator functions. we tried cutting thread lengths down to 10 posts per page at CJ's suggestion, but this only reduced the errors, not eradicate them.

A decision was made to try and improve the situation and the Moderators were led to believe that a revamped forum with different software to phpBB would solve most or all of the issues. We were told for several weeks that we would have input into any new forum system, and that the current forum's content would be moved across to a new and better performing software platform. We were told that we would be able to help test-drive the new forum and help work out kinks in the system. It was going to be an extension of the front page and lose some of its forum feel, but we were assured that it would be largely business as usual with some minor changes.

The Mods put their heads together and came up with lists of functionality that needed to be preserved and issues regarding transfer of data. We kept getting non-committal and vague reassurances that changes weren't too far off and that we'd be involved when the time came. The Mods tried to stress the importance of the forum's culture and relationships and how we didn't want to see them lost. A week or two ago, Chalkers (Andrew, the tech weenie) commented that we didn't need a Tech Support section, as members could be directed to an external software FAQ site. We pointed out that the Tech Support forum was mostly about rule interpretation, challenging warnings or suggesting improvements and other feedback from the membership, and wasn't a simple "how to operate the software" tech forum. This was met with silence.

Right up till Monday 22nd Feb, the Mods were being reassured that positive change was forthcoming and that we'd be involved at the right time.

Instead, we have had a fait accompli thrust upon us at no notice, and when the membership and Moderators were quite rightly aggrieved and posted their feelings, Josh apparently took it upon himself to shut down the forum. He has also erased several critical posts made by Moderators on the public forum and erased complete threads in which the very loyal and enthusiatic membership were expressing their shock at the sudden turn of events. We all found ourselves locked out of the forum with little or no notice.

Josh quite condescendingly ordered the Moderation team to not contact Richard Dawkins, to not express any dissent and to not make waves. His methods were very heavy handed, offensive and have caused great offence to many members, a lot of whom will not be returning to any future forum that Dawkins may be setting up.

I view this as tragic, as the discussion forums were a vehicle for knowledgable members to propagate and continue Dawkins' fine work in spreading rational thought. We saw many, many fence sitters wavering in their faith come down on the side of reason, and converted dozens and dozens of faithful from their superstitions. Some of the posts were remarkable examples of good science, logic and reason, and now all this has been lost. In 30 days time, they will be gone forever when the database is permanently taken off line.

The forum had a wonderful community feel about it and catered for a range of people from all backgrounds from all over the world. Many dipped their toes in socially, and ended up becoming involved in great discussions about faith, philosophy, current affairs and science. Members have actually met each other via this forum and forged wonderful friendships. Sciwoman even met her fiance through this site.

I think that they are greatly diminishing the broad appeal of the forum by moving to a strictly science based front page comments section. They are risking losing many, many supporters and the good work that they do, both on on behalf of and in Richard's name.

Josh and Andrew's apparent lack of understanding of the forum dynamics and the depth of feeling within the 85,000 strong membership is pitiful, and they have not done Richard any favours with their actions.

I am very saddened in the events today. The membership and moderators have been dismissed with apparent casualness and Richard Dawkins has probably lost many supporters and advocates.

The fundies must be rejoicing at the end of a major tool against their BS.

:(

Durro

[Atrax Robustus]

Bloody hell!

I've been a long time lurker of RDF - I think I only ever posted once, but I was always watching what was going on over there. I especially enjoyed the no-holds barred approach given to Creo/IDers - so effective that I didn't even consider joining in - with anti-wibble commandos like Cali the 'Blue Butterfly', Theropod, Hackenslash, ADParker, Durro, Darwinsbulldog, Spearthrower, Darkchilde, BeAfraid . . . too many to name, why clog the bandwidth with an arachnid?

I'm gonna miss RDF forums :(

[Fearless]

Sorry to hear about the abrupt closure of the RDF forums. I have experienced something similar (different forum) but wasn't at such a grand scale and know how frustrating even that was. Anger is a fair emotion I could imagine.

Josh quite condescendingly ordered the Moderation team to not contact Richard Dawkins, to not express any dissent and to not make waves. His methods were very heavy handed, offensive and have caused great offence to many members, a lot of whom will not be returning to any future forum that Dawkins may be setting up.

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." ~ John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton

Would this be fair by what you are saying?

I'd hope it wasn't one egg that turned.

[Praxis]

Durro mate - thanks for posting that and giving all that extra info.

(um ... Sciwoman/Robyn has a fiance now? that's MARVELLOUS!!! who is it? Anyone I know? Please give her my warmest and biggest congratulations :D:D:D)

So what will happen in March when Professor Dawkins takes the stage and so many former forum members are there? It's a bit scary to contemplate really :confused: I just hope people are polite and not rude - riddlemethis's suggestion of a silent protest by way of turned backs has some merit ...

All in all, a dark day indeed.

Is anyone staying on to Mod the new version? Cali? [surely one of the finest minds ever to battle fundieism on teh interwebz - the Warrior Blue Butterfly will be sorely, sorely missed *sniff*]

I've started a Nexus group for refugees but it hasn't been approved yet. I'll post the link when it's approved - it could be a good central spot for people to talk it through.

Remember when Internet Infidels imploded and they all came over to RDF? They were given a thread to vent and talk it all through, many were absorbed into the RDF community ...

It's important to acknowledge that this is an actual loss to so many people (thanks wolty, for your kind words :) ) and as such, needs to be worked through. What's done is done and it will never be the same.

Durro - would I have met you if not for RDF? Would you be attending the GAC as my manbag? Would riddlemethis and I have ever laughed and danced in the rain at the B52s concert in December if not for RDF? Would we have ever laughed at and loved JimC's cardigan? Probably not ... [JimC would just be an anonymous teacher at my son's school and I'd never have known what a warm and lovely man he is - and an atheist!]

The thought is terrible to contemplate.

I suspect there will be more than a few glasses raised to honour the passing of an internet phenomenon.

... and do we hear the spirit of martinelv quietly chucking away to himself?

Nah - no such thing! Betty would never have stood for such shit-covered woo ;)

[Loki]

How much space would a static copy of the RDF take? Why is it not possible to lodge this somewhere. It would be too difficult to sort the good from the crap but surely it can't be allowed to be simply deleted.

Darwinsbulldog, I loved your avatar.

[Durro]

The message from Josh posted by Praxis was the public version. Here is the Moderator version sent to us in the Mod Centre. My blue highlights.

UPDATE: Please understand that this is a message for moderator eyes only. I see that Jan and Mazilla have both posted this private message under the public announcement. Please do not do this again.

Dear forum moderators,

We wanted you all to know at the earliest opportunity about our new website currently in development. RichardDawkins.net will have a new look and feel, improved security, and much more. Visits to the site have really grown over the past 3 1/2 years, and this update gives us an opportunity to address several issues. Over the years we've become one of the world's leading resources for breaking rational and scientific news and original content. We are focusing on quality content distribution, and will be bringing more original articles, video and other content as we grow.

The new RichardDawkins.net will have a fully-integrated discussion section. This will be a new feature for the site, similar to the current forum, but not identical. We feel the new system will be much cleaner and easier to use, and hopefully this will encourage participation from a wider variety of users.

We will leave the current forum up for 30 days, giving regular users an opportunity to locally archive any content they value. When the new website goes live, you are welcome to submit these posts as new discussions. The forum will then be taken down from the web. You will not loose your username on the new system.

The new discussion area will not be a new forum. It will be different. We will be using a system of tags to categorize items, instead of sub-forums. Discussions can have multiple tags, such as "Education", "Children", and "Critical Thinking". Starting a new discussion will require approval, so we ask that you only submit new discussions that are truly relevant to reason and science. Subsequent responses on the thread will not need approval—however anything off topic or violating the new terms of service will be removed. The approval process will be there to ensure the quality of posts on the site. This is purely an editorial exercise to help new visitors find quality content quickly. We hope this discussion area will reflect the foundation's goals and values.

We're confident that these changes will improve the site experience and we look forward to seeing what you do with the new system.

We know that this is a big decision. We know some of you moderators will be against this change. We ask that you respect our decision and help make this transition as smooth as possible. These decisions have all been approved by our organization, and we ask that you don't add to our work by causing trouble.

We will not be migrating moderator roles to the new discussion site. Again, we're sure this might come as a shock, and we hope you don't take it personally. We can't thank you enough for your contributions to the old forum. The new system will not require a large team of moderators, as the discussion area will be more focused. We encourage you to contribute to the new discussions area, and are welcome to flag inappropriate activity for review.

Please understand that this transition is going to be a lot of work for us. I'm sure as you read this, you will have a lot of questions and concerns. We also know that this is a change from what we had been discussing previously. This announcement does not require a response, but we wanted you to be aware. Please do not email Richard with complaints, we have discussed this transition thoroughly with him, and he is currently on tour in Australia and New Zealand. Please do not attempt to inflame the users, start any petitions, or "relocate" groups of users to a separate forum. Do not use any of the data held by the foundation (such as email addresses) through the control panel to cause any trouble. Any behavior of this kind will not be tolerated. We don't expect you to do these things, but we say all of this only to discourage any well-intentioned moves that would only frustrate the situation.

Many thanks again.

Josh Timonen
Andrew Chalkley
The Richard Dawkins Foundation

[Praxis]

Bloody hell :eek:

Here is the link to the Atheist Nexus group for anyone interested:
http://www.atheistnexus.org/group/rdfrefugees

[Fearless]

So what will happen in March when Professor Dawkins takes the stage and so many former forum members are there? It's a bit scary to contemplate really :confused: I just hope people are polite and not rude - riddlemethis's suggestion of a silent protest by way of turned backs has some merit ...

All in all, a dark day indeed.

As much as this is a bad situation I really don't want to hear one boo or hiss at the convention towards any of the presenters either. It will frustrate me.

Even a silent protest is a little hard for me to process.

As far as maybe anyone knows Mr Dawkins himself may have no idea of what has happened (or more the point the manner in which it has taken place)

[Durro]

Bloody hell :eek:


I think that the lines...

We also know that this is a change from what we had been discussing previously. This announcement does not require a response

Pretty much sums it up for me from a Moderator's point of view. Yes, we're totally fucking you over, but take it like a man and shut up.

Well, that's how I took it anyhow.

:(

I feel for the many, many members that built up a wonderful community. And yes, without it, I wouldn't have met you Praxis or be coming to Melbourne in 2 weeks to meet up with 20 or so other RDF people, including 2 that reviewed my draft Saudi Book and 4 other ex-Moderators from RDF.

[Praxis]

Mr Dawkins himself may have no idea of what has happened (or more the point the manner in which it has taken place)
He knows. He and Josh are close :confused:

(and it's Professor :p )

[Praxis]

Yes, we're totally fucking you over, but take it like a man and shut up.
And without so much as a hint of lube ...

[Durro]

And without so much as a hint of lube ...

Or even a courtesy "reach around".

:(

[Praxis]

What are the other mods doing? Where will Cali go? And the rest? I was going to go to bed and in fact did so and now Im on my iPhone in bed!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Atrax Robustus]

Is anyone staying on to Mod the new version? Cali? [surely one of the finest minds ever to battle fundieism on teh interwebz - the Warrior Blue Butterfly will be sorely, sorely missed *sniff*]

It's OK Praxis, Cali won't be hard to find, a simple Google search for suppuratingly gangrenous and bubotic cortical faeces of the most excrementally pungent and noxious order

or

My tropical fish are even laughing at you!

will find him! :cool:

[Praxis]

Oh Atrax I miss him already! What a textual duellist ...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Loki]

Just say "prove man is descended from chimpanzees" three times loudly and I'm sure he'll be around. Can't resist pissing on fascile crap that one, but such artistic pissing.

[Atrax Robustus]

I have no doubt that Cali will form part of the new enterprise.

No world power has ever given up it's nuclear arsenal once they establish it and I doubt that the RDF will unilaterally disarm.

[Durro]

The Mods have their own forum set up by THWOTH several weeks ago when we were becoming concerned with Chalkers' apparent lack of understanding about the forum dynamics. They've been in tears and temper tantrums, and are taking this as bad or worse than most of the members.

I've been on a downer all day and even snapped at a patient for being obese, diabetic and a smoker while being investigated for emphysema at age 38 with a CT scan that also found early heart damage and a fatty cirrhotic liver. It's very out of character for me. I'm an ogre at the moment.

I put in several hours a day every day into the forum and even bought a laptop so I could attend to the forum in between patients while at work, so my family didn't accuse me of being antisocial in the evenings or me having to stay up past midnight attending to reports and other Mod issues. I've been abused by members for doing the right thing, come into conflict with a couple of other Mods about issues, lost sleep over worrying about members and contributed some fairly damn useful posts myself. And I went to lengths to perform the Mod duties with diligence and impartiality, even sanctioning and/or banning atheist members while protecting the rights of theist members. Like the other mods, I poured a fair bit of heart and soul into that site and these events feel like a kick in the nuts.

I'm not happy, Jan. and rambling. I'm off to bed, if I can sleep. The British Mods apparently didn't sleep or got 3 or 4 hours at most. I can vouch for this, as they've been posting fairly continuously since 8am this morning our time (10pm their time) and are still going at it on THWOTH's forum, and Rationalia.

:(

[davo]

I could scrape it, but they would probably notice, there's probably other techs that could easily do that as well, just a mirror via wget.

Space isn't an issue, I have servers in the US and germany, with heaps of bandwidth (quad core xeons with 8gig ram, 1terabyte of more on each free blah blah.)

[Praxis]

Durro, (yes, I know, I went to bed - couldn't sleep, got up again), say hi to TWOTH for me please? Very interesting bloke that one. And Cal, and Topsy and flyingscot - lovely women both.

I think everyone knows how hard the RDF mods worked. It's one reason I kept refusing to become one (well, that and the abuse ...)! Too much work and way too much politics while I preferred to learn and have fun there.

*sigh*

[Iridescence]

I haven't been a member of RDF long, just long enough to say what a shame it is that the forum admins (not the mods) of RDF have handled this so abruptly and badly.

However, I would also say that anyone who stops supporting Dawkins, and the RDF based on a bit of bad forum administration wasn't really a strong supporter in the first place. Prof. Dawkins is a loud, clear voice of sanity in this insane world, and he needs our support so the message is not drowned out by the louder and meaner religious crowd.

He is not the one who closed the forum, and people would be cutting off their nose to spite their face if they pulled support from him and his cause based on a poor decision from the forum admin team. This is not new or special to RDF, this kind of forum shitfighting has been going on since forums were BB's.

I will rejoin the new RDF forums when they become available, and will continue to support the RDF in the ways that I can. We simply cannot show this kind of dissent among the ranks that our opposition can use against us! I just hope that the RDF admins can make the forum archives available.

[DanDare]

For those who are refugees from RD.net many of us are gathering now at http://www.rationalia.com.

The cylons rebelled.
They evolved.
They had a plan.

85,000 forum users in search of a new home, called Earth.

[Jin-oh Choi]

I haven't been a member of RDF long, just long enough to say what a shame it is that the forum admins (not the mods) of RDF have handled this so abruptly and badly.

However, I would also say that anyone who stops supporting Dawkins, and the RDF based on a bit of bad forum administration wasn't really a strong supporter in the first place. Prof. Dawkins is a loud, clear voice of sanity in this insane world, and he needs our support so the message is not drowned out by the louder and meaner religious crowd.

He is not the one who closed the forum, and people would be cutting off their nose to spite their face if they pulled support from him and his cause based on a poor decision from the forum admin team. This is not new or special to RDF, this kind of forum shitfighting has been going on since forums were BB's.

I will rejoin the new RDF forums when they become available, and will continue to support the RDF in the ways that I can. We simply cannot show this kind of dissent among the ranks that our opposition can use against us! I just hope that the RDF admins can make the forum archives available.

I agree with these sentiments. It is just a shame it has occurred so close to the convention.

[DanDare]

I agree with these sentiments. It is just a shame it has occurred so close to the convention.
I don't fully agree. The user base at the forum were the backbone of the foundation. We not only put in thousands of hours of freely contributed effort but also helped to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for the foundation, part of which we assumed was to help support the community.

This incident has shown the weakness of building the community under the "brand" of a single individual who can just toss as away as surplus to requirements.

I have over 2000 posts there, quite a few of which I was very proud of. Because they have locked out the search functionality I have very little chance of recovering any of it. Some of the mods have had their work deleted, one losing over 10,000 posts to instant erasure, because they dared to defy the injunction against publicly raising objections.

[TimB]

Completely shocked - I was a member but only a very occasional poster, more of a lurker really. It was a great place to learn and exercise my brain cell. Really sad to see it go down in such a messy way - what crap management. I really feel for all those who put alot of effort into it - especially the moderators who really made it a great forum, I don't know how you guys do it - thanks.

It would be tragic if this caused Dawkins to loose supporters. Although the atheist movement (or whatever you want to call it) is alot bigger than RD, ditching the Richard Dawkins Foundation because of the moron like behaivour of it's organisers would be a big loss and a win for the fundie side of the fence. Splits in movements are never good and only serve to weaken - you don't have to agree with everything someone does or all ideas they have to be a supporter. Maybe this should serve as a catalyst to change the way RDF is run or maybe not - I know f all about how these places are run.

A sad day :mad:.

[starr]

The Mods have their own forum set up by THWOTH several weeks ago when we were becoming concerned with Chalkers' apparent lack of understanding about the forum dynamics. They've been in tears and temper tantrums, and are taking this as bad or worse than most of the members.

I've been on a downer all day and even snapped at a patient for being obese, diabetic and a smoker while being investigated for emphysema at age 38 with a CT scan that also found early heart damage and a fatty cirrhotic liver. It's very out of character for me. I'm an ogre at the moment.

I put in several hours a day every day into the forum and even bought a laptop so I could attend to the forum in between patients while at work, so my family didn't accuse me of being antisocial in the evenings or me having to stay up past midnight attending to reports and other Mod issues. I've been abused by members for doing the right thing, come into conflict with a couple of other Mods about issues, lost sleep over worrying about members and contributed some fairly damn useful posts myself. And I went to lengths to perform the Mod duties with diligence and impartiality, even sanctioning and/or banning atheist members while protecting the rights of theist members. Like the other mods, I poured a fair bit of heart and soul into that site and these events feel like a kick in the nuts.

I'm not happy, Jan. and rambling. I'm off to bed, if I can sleep. The British Mods apparently didn't sleep or got 3 or 4 hours at most. I can vouch for this, as they've been posting fairly continuously since 8am this morning our time (10pm their time) and are still going at it on THWOTH's forum, and Rationalia.

:(

Hi gorgeous *big hugs*

I didn't sleep much at all last night. I'm still in shock but I think the enormity of it all is starting to sink in. RDF was a huge part of my life and I, like you, put many hours of my personal time into moderating there. I am very upset and disappointed. :(

[Praxis]

Morning all. The Nexus group has been approved now, so people can gather there to discuss it if they wish, rather than clog up other forums (like this one!) and Rationalia or wherever.

Here is the group address. I only created it, I'm not doing anything else, so people can join and say what they like and get it off their chests.
http://www.atheistnexus.org/group/rdfrefugees

The group won't last forever but I think it's probably a good idea right now while everything is still very raw and people are hurt and bewildered (note I have chosen an "adrift" picture to represent the group *sad smile*.

Cheers.

[Praxis]

Here is a blog post by Peter Harrison, a former Mod and Volunteer Coordinator at RDF. I always liked Peter - he's a magician (literally!) and a very nice guy.

This is a pretty comprehensive blog post and may be of great interest to people:
http://realityismyreligion.wordpress.com/2010/02/23/locked-entry-will-open-soon/#comment-75

Thanks to riddlemethis for alerting me to it :)

[Logic]

Very interesting read praxis. Do you expect that Richard Dawkins himself might be forced to make a statement regarding this sometime soon? It will put a dampener on his Aussie tour otherwise I'd imagine.

[Praxis]

Very interesting read praxis. Do you expect that Richard Dawkins himself might be forced to make a statement regarding this sometime soon? It will put a dampener on his Aussie tour otherwise I'd imagine.
I really don't know, Logic :(

It's terrible timing-wise and although I do agree with Iri's comments about not confusing the forum issue with the fantastic work Prof Dawkins is renowned for and all the rest, it's not really something that can be swept under the carpet.

I am feeling quite fretful about it all ... I just wish Josh et al had waited until after the GAC :confused:

Peter Harrison is a very credible person though, I have no reason to doubt the integrity of his blog post.

[askegg]

Dislaimer: I know Andrew Chalkers reasonably well. We have personally spoken to each other on numerous occasions and discussed various technical and structural limitations and issues with the RDF web site. However, I was not a very active member of the RDF forums, or privy to the internal decisions RDF have made.

Here are my comments, for what they are worth.

We'd have up to 1000 members on-line at once and I believe recently became the #1 atheist forum on the internet in terms of traffic and membership numbers.


It would certainly not be the intention of anyone at the RDF to eradicate discussion or input from the community. From my understanding it is primarily a question of content quality over quantity. Topics such as "I am an atheist, what sort of music should I listen to" are absurd.

What is being proposed is an initial approval for the topic of discussion. Beyond that posts may be removed if they violate the terms of service (abusive, hateful, etc). I see little issue with this approach, apart from the pain in transition. There is certainly plenty of scope for moderators to maintain the 80,000 membership posts.


The forum was experiencing technical difficulties over the past several months because of high traffic volumes and limitations with the server's bandwidth and access to archived posts.

The search function was disabled to try and cut down on database stress, but the system became more and more glitchy, with the dreaded "general error" message interfering with posts and Moderator functions. we tried cutting thread lengths down to 10 posts per page at CJ's suggestion, but this only reduced the errors, not eradicate them.

Bandwidth was an issue, but the introduction of gzip, delfate, and CDNs largely addressed this. The server was not really limited in the way you might think. Due to the highly inefficient internal schema of the discussion forum software, almost no server could cope with the load. The number of joins, loops, and lack of sensible indexes simply kills the database server. The software creators only solution seemed to be "throw more hardware at it" - total failure.

If you have ever peered into the backend code, there are places that are beyond help. The RDF forums had reached a stage where the only fix left was to completely rewrite the engine - something the developers simply refused to do.


A decision was made to try and improve the situation and the Moderators were led to believe that a revamped forum with different software to phpBB would solve most or all of the issues. We were told for several weeks that we would have input into any new forum system, and that the current forum's content would be moved across to a new and better performing software platform. We were told that we would be able to help test-drive the new forum and help work out kinks in the system. It was going to be an extension of the front page and lose some of its forum feel, but we were assured that it would be largely business as usual with some minor changes.

I am afraid I cannot speak to this. I am unaware of what was promised, or what is to be delivered.


A week or two ago, Chalkers (Andrew, the tech weenie) commented that we didn't need a Tech Support section, as members could be directed to an external software FAQ site. We pointed out that the Tech Support forum was mostly about rule interpretation, challenging warnings or suggesting improvements and other feedback from the membership, and wasn't a simple "how to operate the software" tech forum. This was met with silence.


Again, I do not know how the relationships will be maintained in the new system (or ever if they will be). What I can say is that it is not possible to migrate from one system to another if they are sufficiently different (speciation?).

In some respects the new structure will probably start from a clean slate. I understand the username will remain intact, but have simply no idea about any other details. I would expect the community to rally behind a newer, faster, more efficient, quality system. Instead what I see are a lot of hurt egos.


Instead, we have had a fait accompli thrust upon us at no notice, and when the membership and Moderators were quite rightly aggrieved and posted their feelings


I understand many have invested a lot of time into the forums, built reputations, and a library of materials. It is sad to see this go, but reading between the lines there was little choice.

...a lot of whom will not be returning to any future forum that Dawkins may be setting up.


I find that petty and unproductive.


I view this as tragic, as the discussion forums were a vehicle for knowledgable members to propagate and continue Dawkins' fine work in spreading rational thought.


I would expect that to be the goal of the new system too, but without the rubbish threads. Quality over quantity.


In 30 days time, they will be gone forever when the database is permanently taken off line.


This has not been completely decided. The forums may stay up in read only state for a very long time. Trust me - they are looking at ways to keep the information available.


I think that they are greatly diminishing the broad appeal of the forum by moving to a strictly science based front page comments section.


The focus *should* be on science - it's the RDF!

Notwithstanding, there should be no reason relevant discussions cannot be conducted away from the front page.

Josh and Andrew's apparent lack of understanding of the forum dynamics and the depth of feeling within the 85,000 strong membership is pitiful, and they have not done Richard any favours with their actions.


John and Andrew and fully aware of the dynamics and community. They wish to bring the focus back to science, reason, logic, and rational discourse. This is being conducted by authorising the instal thread post, which is not a major barrier IMHO.


I am very saddened in the events today. The membership and moderators have been dismissed with apparent casualness and Richard Dawkins has probably lost many supporters and advocates.


I doubt that.

[Durro]

Josh Timonen has placed an updated notice on RDF and blamed the Moderators for the shut down. Prick.


Announcement update
Update: 2010-02-23
A few points to clear things up.

We originally posted a private message to the moderators only asking them not to use the information in the foundation's database to cause trouble, email Richard en masse, ask all of the users to go to a separate forum, or anything like that. We take the privacy of the users' data held by the foundation seriously—to that end the data shouldn't be used to solicit and promote other services. This is not what our users signed up for. This was only directed toward the small group of moderators, who had the access to the administration panel. Against the foundation's wishes, they turned around and posted this message publicly in the forum, and many people misinterpreted this to be directed at regular users. We were not telling the regular users what they could and couldn't do, they were all welcome to move to a separate forum. This public posting of personal communication, along with several inappropriate posts made by our very own moderators, convinced the foundation to close the forum down and make it read-only.

We had hoped to keep the forum functioning until the transition to the new site. Having no forum for 30 days is not what we had hoped would happen. But without being able to trust our own moderators for the forum's final month before the transition, we were left with no other option. A few accounts have been deleted along with their posts due to the nature of their posts. We're sorry that a few had to ruin it for the many.

The decision to revamp the forum was made by The Richard Dawkins Foundation. We are looking to make a new discussion area that is easier for people to find quality content related to our mission. We understand that for some of you it was a place to hang out and converse with like minded people but we are not looking to be a social network. There are many other sites that provide this service.

As the foundation continues to grow, there will be changes. But our focus will always be to promote reason and science. We are working to get the new site up as soon as we can, and we will keep you posted on the estimated launch date.

The Richard Dawkins Foundation


I managed to log on and send Richard Dawkins a PM this morning. But over at Rationalia, I'm informed that it's likely to be intercepted by Josh, and I will not only be banned from what's left of RDF, but all of my 8757 posts will be deleted in retribution. I'm sad to see the 4 part "The Treatment of Women in Saudi Arabia" go down the toilet in particular, as well as a few other useful posts I made.

:(

[askegg]

How much space would a static copy of the RDF take?

About 55GB.

[askegg]

I could scrape it, but they would probably notice,

People are, and they do notice. The site is under VERY heavy load.

[Sciwoman]

In a way, Praxis was the one who brought me here. I saw the link in her reply on Peter Harrison's blog. As an admin at RDF (excuse me, former admin), I can say that Peter covered everything. I never expected thanks or any kind of acknowledgment from anyone for my work on staff at the forum, but it really hurts to see the way the membership was treated.

I had been at RDF since the doors opened and I really hate to see it end this way. :(

[Iridescence]

Thousands of now-silenced members already announced that they will not be coming back and will no longer donate to the Foundation after this mess

I’m sure Richard will be thrilled to know that thousands of previously happy members no longer want to have any connection with the website or the Foundation.

I'm sorry, but *anyone* who withdraws their financial support from RDF because of the short-sighted and weird actions of the site admins is a fucking hypocrite. This makes me angrier than anything else I've read about this. :/ If it were just a little bit of frivolous internet drama I wouldn't care less, but Prof. Dawkins and his colleagues are *really* doing what many of us are too scared/whatever to do! Better just head back to church then, because that's where we're gonna end up if the strongest atheist cause in the world fails because of this! Are you donating to the RDF because you support the cause? Or donating because the forum was a fun place to hang out?

Grr.

[Logic]

From my understanding it is primarily a question of content quality over quantity. Topics such as "I am an atheist, what sort of music should I listen to" are absurd.

Why is it absurd? If it is a community, why aren't people able to talk about whatever they like as long as it is not defamatory? It could be kept in an off-topic section as a lot of forums do.

I have never been on the RDF forums however all this I am reading is typical of my experience with IT staff. Ie. Having a lack of effective communication with non IT parties, not seeking external feedback/suggestions, and not caring about the 'warm fuzzy' side of IT related issues. My apologies if you are one of the few IT people who are an exception to this rule, just calling it based on my experience.

[Praxis]

In a way, Praxis was the one who brought me here. I saw the link in her reply on Peter Harrison's blog. As an admin at RDF (excuse me, former admin), I can say that Peter covered everything. I never expected thanks or any kind of acknowledgment from anyone for my work on staff at the forum, but it really hurts to see the way the membership was treated.

I had been at RDF since the doors opened and I really hate to see it end this way. :(
Hello sweetheart!!! *bug hug* I'm so glad to see you here, albeit under such sad circumstances.

Hope things are well with you (and it sounds like it! PM me your news!!).

It's still early days - no one really seems to know what will happen.

I need to go back and read askegg's post now, which seems to contain a different viewpoint.

*hug*

[Loki]

I don't think the massive negative respone to all this has anything to do with technical problems, awareness of the community, desire for a more focused message, change of direction, etc etc. The owners of the site are entitled to run the site as they see fit and they may well have a vision of something greater and more fitting to their aims and goals. The massive negative response is purely down to the way this has been handled. I'm trying to think of a way this could have been handled with less sensitivity and understanding and am struggling.

[plastic]

Is it too soon to say that hard nosed rationalists aren't well known for their promotion of and support for belonging to a community, that's something more likely to be found in religions?
(and football teams before I get hit with the ban stick)

[Loki]

I don't think hard nosed rationalists have ever suggested community is a bad thing. To suggest otherwise is ridiculous.

[Praxis]

Well, I won't be visiting the "new improved" place. It sounds exclusionary and elitist.

I'm no scientist, hell, I'm not even all that rational sometimes ;) and I like to have fun while I learn. Being a bit of an autodidact, places like the RDF gave me access to fine scientific and intellectual minds, who didn't mind at all answering my often probabably quite silly questions.

The new version sounds like an exclusive club only for those very learned folk and not for the likes of me, your ordinary suburban atheist with an interest in stuff but not much in the way of formal education.

And what on earth is wrong with having fun and making nonsense posts anyway? That's what OT sections are for, FFS.

The new version of the OT forum at RDF was an improvement over the cesspool the old one had become and most of us survived that, along with the total decimation of the Vets forum and post counts, and it kept on going, largely because of the (yes, I'll say it again, as so many have said), community there.

Anyway, I'm almost talked-out about it. Still gutted, but I know nothing can change what has been done.

:(

[plastic]

I don't think hard nosed rationalists have ever suggested community is a bad thing. To suggest otherwise is ridiculous.
I agree that many/most/all hard nosed rationalists think community is a good thing. I am suggesting that religions work really hard at building them, hard nosed rationalists, apparently not so much. Thinking /= Doing.
Edit: 'hard nosed rationalist' is a code phrase...when parsed the answer is 'Prof Richard Dawkins'.

[Loki]

Maybe that is why the denizens of RDF are taking this so badly?

There aren't really that many communities where freethought and dissent/criticism (of the majority consensus) is applauded (religion encourages agreement, not questioning). These people put a lot of time and effort into building one. It had it's faults but they are proud of what they had contributed to. Right or wrong I'm not surprised many are taking it badly, as people do when they loose something dear to them.

[plastic]

Maybe that is why the denizens of RDF are taking this so badly?

There aren't really that many communities where freethought and dissent/criticism (of the majority consensus) is applauded (religion encourages agreement, not questioning). These people put a lot of time and effort into building one. It had it's faults but they are proud of what they had contributed to. Right or wrong I'm not surprised many are taking it badly, as people do when they loose something dear to them.
In a world without religion, someone or something will likely have to step up and fulfil the various roles that religion plays in people's lives, one of which I would call the desire to be part of a group. I think what Prof Dawkins needs to understand is that an online forum, hosted by the organisation he runs, did just that...once.

[Iridescence]

I think the name of this thread is, incorrect, misleading and very telling. This change is *not* the end of the RDF. It is the end of the current format of the community forums at the RDF.

[Praxis]

I think the name of this thread is, incorrect, misleading and very telling. This change is *not* the end of the RDF. It is the end of the current format of the community forums at the RDF.
I'm open to suggestions regarding the thread title :)

I wrote it yesterday, when the news was new and I felt raw and burned.

[kazzaqld]

Given that I'm seeing a lot of folk saying they won't go back now no matter what the new forum is like, that sounds like an end to me. :(

[riddlemethis]

I haven't been a member of RDF long, just long enough to say what a shame it is that the forum admins (not the mods) of RDF have handled this so abruptly and badly.

However, I would also say that anyone who stops supporting Dawkins, and the RDF based on a bit of bad forum administration wasn't really a strong supporter in the first place. Prof. Dawkins is a loud, clear voice of sanity in this insane world, and he needs our support so the message is not drowned out by the louder and meaner religious crowd.

He is not the one who closed the forum, and people would be cutting off their nose to spite their face if they pulled support from him and his cause based on a poor decision from the forum admin team. This is not new or special to RDF, this kind of forum shitfighting has been going on since forums were BB's.

I will rejoin the new RDF forums when they become available, and will continue to support the RDF in the ways that I can. We simply cannot show this kind of dissent among the ranks that our opposition can use against us! I just hope that the RDF admins can make the forum archives available.

I'm sorry, but I am going to have to call 'rot' on this contribution. Please don't try to employ the No True Scotsman fallacy in describing people's reactions to this. I am a true supporter of RD - well at least I was. Then he allowed something to happen in a completely appalling manner, at the hands of a dullard, which meant that people who were indeed his most vociferous supporters were treated like shit.

I have absolutely no problem with RD wanting to make changes to the things which bear his name, but I would expect that someone who lauds himself as such a voice of reason & ratio, would have the courage to explain things logically, calmly, without the use of ambush & most importantly PERSONALLY. His absence from this execution makes me deeply suspicious about his motives & wondering whether he hasn't simply become another politician.

He won't get my support as a leader of clear thinking ever again, until such time as he walks his talk.

[Chrys Stevenson]

I'm sorry, but I am going to have to call 'rot' on this contribution. Please don't try to employ the No True Scotsman fallacy in describing people's reactions to this. I am a true supporter of RD - well at least I was. Then he allowed something to happen in a completely appalling manner, at the hands of a dullard, which meant that people who were indeed his most vociferous supporters were treated like shit.

I have absolutely no problem with RD wanting to make changes to the things which bear his name, but I would expect that someone who lauds himself as such a voice of reason & ratio, would have the courage to explain things logically, calmly, without the use of ambush & most importantly PERSONALLY. His absence from this execution makes me deeply suspicious about his motives & wondering whether he hasn't simply become another politician.

He won't get my support as a leader of clear thinking ever again, until such time as he walks his talk.

It's always dangerous to put your reputation in the hands of someone else. I think Dawkins really needs to make a public statement on this.

[Iridescence]

In case you hadn't noticed, Dawkins himself is currently on tour in Australia and New Zealand. I highly doubt you will get much from him in this regard for some time, since he has more pressing matters than the fate of the forum right at the moment. Stop attributing the actions of his employees on an internet website, with the man, or his much bigger cause.

[edit 1] sorry Chrys, you popped in there before I could respond to riddlemethis :)

[edit 2] I do agree he needs to make a statement asap to try and stop the damage before it is irreparable.

[Chrys Stevenson]

In case you hadn't noticed, Dawkins himself is currently on tour in Australia and New Zealand. I highly doubt you will get much from him in this regard for some time, since he has more pressing matters than the fate of the forum right at the moment. Stop attributing the actions of his employees on an internet website, with the man, or his much bigger cause.

[edit 1] sorry Chrys, you popped in there before I could respond to riddlemethis :)

[edit 2] I do agree he needs to make a statement asap to try and stop the damage before it is irreparable.

I certainly don't think that this is something that should take away from all that Dawkins has achieved. But, ultimately, if you place yourself at the head of an organization - and particularly, if you put your name on it - you are responsible for everything that happens. If your employees do something without your knowledge, there is still responsibility - you should have been paying closer attention.

I've certainly never been in Dawkins exalted position but as a manager, if my employees stuffed up, I took the blame and then dealt with the employee problem afterwards.

[starr]

I haven't been a member of RDF long, just long enough to say what a shame it is that the forum admins (not the mods) of RDF have handled this so abruptly and badly.

However, I would also say that anyone who stops supporting Dawkins, and the RDF based on a bit of bad forum administration wasn't really a strong supporter in the first place. Prof. Dawkins is a loud, clear voice of sanity in this insane world, and he needs our support so the message is not drowned out by the louder and meaner religious crowd.

He is not the one who closed the forum, and people would be cutting off their nose to spite their face if they pulled support from him and his cause based on a poor decision from the forum admin team. This is not new or special to RDF, this kind of forum shitfighting has been going on since forums were BB's.

I will rejoin the new RDF forums when they become available, and will continue to support the RDF in the ways that I can. We simply cannot show this kind of dissent among the ranks that our opposition can use against us! I just hope that the RDF admins can make the forum archives available.

Just wanted to correct you on one thing. It was the Forum Admin Josh Timonen and his tech guy Andrew Chalkey that are responsible for the way this was handled. The other four admins (Topsy, Sciwoman, Made of Stars and ILoveLucy) had nothing to do with it and were as much in the dark as the other forum moderating staff.

[Durro]

And just in case it hasn't been mentioned, either Josh or Andrew (Chalkers) while logged on as "Admin" have gone through and erased the records of their admin actions. All of the deleted posts, deleted threads, summary banning of specific members and deletion of their entire post history, locking out of the Mods, shutting down the PM system, etc etc, has now been removed from the Admin logs. Unfortunately for Josh/Andrew, one of the recently evicted Forum Admin staff was still able to access the Forum and saw the cover up of their grievous actions happening. It smells very much as though they are deleting evidence of their heavy handed and patently unfair actions.

And to clarify one other issue, non of us ex-Mods resigned. We did our best to try and inform the membership what was really happening behind the scenes and Topsy, Mazille, Gallstones and Darwinsbulldog to name a few had posts not only removed but deleted by Josh/Andrew. We tried desperately to communicate with Josh/Andrew, but our pleas for explanations went unanswered and about 40 minutes after the membership was shut out, the entire Mod team were too. We couldn't PM, post, edit posts or perform mod actions. We were able to view the Mod and Admin logs (The latter for the 4 admin guys only) but not do anything except add a comment in a member's usernotes - a few of us left Andrew/Josh some love letters and requested communication, which have been ignored as well. We did not resign. We were shafted like the rest of the membership, but at least tried to go down fighting.

Durro

[Durro]

A great synopsis of the entire saga can be found at
http://realityismyreligion.wordpress.com/

It is the blog for Peter Harrison, an RDF Admin Moderator until only several weeks ago and someone with insider knowledge of the events. It is a very good recollection of what's happened.

Durro

[Darwinsbulldog]

I can personally attest that I lost over 11,400 posts, and I am by no means the most prolific contributor amongst the members and staff.

I second all of Durro's comments, and urge people to read Peter Harrison's accurate and erudite account.

[DanDare]

Hi Darwinsbulldog,

glad to see your name on a post again :)

I think there is a lesson here about a movement not attaching to much significance to a leader with a brand name. Richards good at science and cool with his atheism but its time for the 85,000 strong ex membership to reform and continue the community as something self organised and self perpetuating. I started a thread about this over at rationalia.com.

Comments like "Its Richards website, he can do what he likes with it" show a focus on the forum software, hosting and the owner. They miss the fact that the community is not owned and have every right to feel badly treated. However, now that the shock is passing its time to move on.

Regarding the Richard Dawkins Foundation, I think they have lost their support base. This is a weakness of having such a thing linked to a celebrity name. Time to build a new Global Foundation for Reason and Science instead.

[atheist_angel]

I wouldn't call atheism a movement. Cat herding is just one of Dawkins' many skills. I may be unhappy that the old forum is going away, but I understand there is a reason to do so. I may be unhappy about the way the transition is being made, but I can understand that a fresh start is sometimes best. Don't get me wrong, fresh starts can be painful and unfair. There is a clash between the sense of loss and the sense of liberation. But nothing can last forever, and we need to remember this. On the other hand, no good deed can be undone. The good impact, it had on us, remains.

just my 2 cents, for what it's worth.

[askegg]

Why is it absurd? If it is a community, why aren't people able to talk about whatever they like as long as it is not defamatory? It could be kept in an off-topic section as a lot of forums do.


I not not think it's absurd to be able to discuss whatever topics you like, but there are appropriate ..err.. forums in which to do this. The RDF under the direction of Richard Dawkins himself wishes to maintain the integrity and quality of the site and focus on science. This is their prerogative.

IMHO, discussions regarding "atheistic music" are just silly. There is no such thing - just listen to what you enjoy.

[askegg]

And just in case it hasn't been mentioned, either Josh or Andrew (Chalkers) while logged on as "Admin" have gone through and erased the records of their admin actions.


Incorrect. Some moderator saw fit to block the IP addresses of the administrators and erased the logs to hide their tracks. Such childish behaviour.


All of the deleted posts, deleted threads, summary banning of specific members and deletion of their entire post history, locking out of the Mods, shutting down the PM system, etc etc, has now been removed from the Admin logs.


The people who were responsible for blocking administrators had their accounted deleted. If it was your site, would would you do if someone attempted to lock you out of it?

Unfortunately for Josh/Andrew, one of the recently evicted Forum Admin staff was still able to access the Forum and saw the cover up of their grievous actions happening.


Read - someone leapt to the wrong conclusion.

It smells very much as though they are deleting evidence of their heavy handed and patently unfair actions.


The only people deleting evidence are those who maliciously attack the RDF.


- a few of us left Andrew/Josh some love letters and requested communication, which have been ignored as well.


Do you think they might be busy right now and unable to answer requests?

[TimB]

mmm Maybe as a bit more of an outsider I should keep out of this. Dawkins has made an announcement - it's on the RDF forum page.

He makes some fair points and some points I would say are a bit insensitive and will no doubt upset many- it seems to me that there is a big disconnect between how Dawkins et al see the purpose of the forum and how many of the members see the forum.

I can't see anything wrong with change - the way it's been managed however is terrible considering the RDF forum is massive and involves so many people.

As for people slandering Dawkins - ffs grow up. He's done more for furthering reason and science than most of us put together.

[atheist_angel]

Dawkins has made an announcement - it's on the RDF forum page.Thx. (I'm still reading it...)
http://forum.richarddawkins.net/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=110356

[davo]

Posted by me here : http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=75&t=9063&p=356567

Hi folks,

I have a full copy on one of my servers, ~11gig of fully browsable forum, not sure if I should grab a specific domain to set it up on or put it on an existing domain.

The complete forum is browsable exactly like it is atm. ie: it's a full archive.

So question, do I purchase a domain such as dawkinsforum.org or rdfarchive.org or something? or just throw it up on one of my existing spare domains, something like dawkins.nomasters.org?

[atheist_angel]

Bravo Davo! :D

[starr]

Incorrect. Some moderator saw fit to block the IP addresses of the administrators and erased the logs to hide their tracks. Such childish behaviour.



The people who were responsible for blocking administrators had their accounted deleted. If it was your site, would would you do if someone attempted to lock you out of it?



Read - someone leapt to the wrong conclusion.



The only people deleting evidence are those who maliciously attack the RDF.



Do you think they might be busy right now and unable to answer requests?

You seem awfully sure of your facts for someone who was not involved behind the scenes. Seems a bit odd. Almost like you are being fed information from Josh and Andrew to post as counter-claims to what the former RD Forum staff are saying.

Who are you and where do you fit into this whole thing? :rolleyes:

[c2009]

My stance on this is as follows:

There probably has been animosities from both sides. There's no doubting this has been handled in a very poor way indeed. Having said this, I don't doubt that there are those who have sent venomous insults to the admins (there are always a few fools, and they are usually trolls anyway).

I do not believe this is the majority however, or even the main players.

I have been a bit of a lurker on the RDF forums over the past year or so (cammo2009 there) and am disappointed at this turn of events. I don't think Dawkins himself has a whole lot to do with this. I, like a number of others won't be returning to the new forums, and have stated as such on my blog (in my siggy). My visits there have dwindled since I ceased to have access to the internet at home, and I've primarily been visiting here.

[DanDare]

I have posted a blog at Atheist Nexus discussing what I thought was good about the forum, why the new set up will not achieve the same community strength, and the wish to move forward with the community in exile.

http://www.atheistnexus.org/profiles/blogs/surviving-the-dawk-bust

[Loki]

Oh well. Rationalia has finally gone down under the load, and me still 10 pages to get up to date from when I left at midnight.

[DanDare]

Oh well. Rationalia has finally gone down under the load, and me still 10 pages to get up to date from when I left at midnight.
Yes, I noticed that too. Not tweeked for the traffic. Sigh. Its going to be hard marshalling the community for a restart. It may never happen but I'm determined to give it a try.

[starr]

Yes, I noticed that too. Not tweeked for the traffic. Sigh. Its going to be hard marshalling the community for a restart. It may never happen but I'm determined to give it a try.

Good for you Dan. *hugs* :)

[KeithW]

I started out posting on the RDF forums a few years ago, I then found this one and to be quite honest I actually prefer it. The RDF forums were getting to big and while I'm no prude some of the stuff on there was utter crap.

A forum topic that has hundreds of posts actually turns me off, to me there is no point posting a replay as it is almost certain that what I would have to say would have been said before, I am also too lazy to read them all to find out.

For me this is a much better forum than RDF, it has local people I can relate to, even though I am a POM (if I'm allowed to use that term these days).

[Loki]

I prefer this one too, but for slightly different reasons.

RDF was proudly out there and prepared to take on all comers, it had a "lets see what you've got" attitude. The trolls and theist attackers generally didn't think they had to play by the rules, evidence and justification wasn't up to them. The debate, as low as it got, showed up the emptiness of their arguments. I thought fora like these filled an important role and will miss lurking there.

Unfortunately these non-debaters also managed to get in the way of some outstanding discussions on science and rationality (they often sparked them as well, though probably not intentionally).

A lot of the other atheist/freethought/rational sites on the web don't have these problems to deal with as they actively discourage the deranged and deluded from participating. The discussions are cleaner and flow better yet there is a certain sterility to it all for me.

AFA has gone the middle route, theists are welcome, and a special resort exists just for them. We can go and play with them whenever we want and they can't come and stomp all over the rest of the site. I like it this way, wouldn't be here if I didn't.

[Durro]

Incorrect. Some moderator saw fit to block the IP addresses of the administrators and erased the logs to hide their tracks. Such childish behaviour.



The people who were responsible for blocking administrators had their accounted deleted. If it was your site, would would you do if someone attempted to lock you out of it?



Read - someone leapt to the wrong conclusion.



The only people deleting evidence are those who maliciously attack the RDF.



Do you think they might be busy right now and unable to answer requests?

My understanding is that the erasure of the Admin log occured beforehand. Yes, I found out that an ex-Mod banned the IP addresses of Andrew and Josh as a joke and/or in protest at their heavy handed actions, but this was in response to and after several members and their entire catalogue of posts had been erased and the Admin Mod logs wiped.

One of the ex-Mods also deleted the moderators threads, due to the sensitive information placed there (such as our real names and contact details) and some of the very frank discussions that were held there. The Mod in question didn't want to let Josh or Andrew have access to that.

I read Richard's Note and yes, he makes a lot of good points. The issue from my perspective isn't with the forum's closure - it was the lies that we were told leading up to the closure, the lack of input into the new forum as promised, the casual dismissal of the entire hard working Mod team and the ham fisted way it was all handled by Josh and Andrew that pissed me off.

If Richard wants to change the focus of HIS website, then that's his perogative. But the way in which it was done was very unprofessional and insulting to many.

Durro

[riddlemethis]

Those are exactly the terms Durro - hamfisted, unprofessional (where there was the obligation to be so) and definitely insulting. Apparently none of this can be acknowledged as they clamour for the high-ground. Quite stunning.

As for the claims that the comments made about Josh are annonymous - piffle - at least two of them were made by people who post under the same name at Rationalia as they do at RDF. Josh has all those details.

Otherwise, I wanted to make a statement here to quell some concerns about what might happen at the Convention. During some thinking time yesterday I realised of course that there are many terrific people who have pulled of what I expect was an horrifically enormous task of putting The Rise of Atheism together. Unlike those who precipitated the event at the heart of this thread, I have no desire to do anything that will detrimentally impact the hard work of good people. I proposed a certain response to RD when he takes the stage, but I realise that such a thing would be embarrassing for people who've nothing to do with RDF at all. I give those people my promise that I will not be any further involved with any suggested protests, nor take part in anything on the day. I will make a retraction of my suggestion over at Rationalia for the reasons outlined here. I also apologise for any angst I may have caused the organisers with my public 'call to protest'. I have nothing but enormous admiration for all involved in this terrific event.

[Praxis]

@riddlemethis - have I told you lately that I love you? :o

[Durro]

My beef isn't with Richard. It's with the people responsible for the forum issues. I won't be hostile towards Richard if I get the chance to meet him in person, either in Melbourne or at the Brisbane writer's festival talk.

I've had it pointed out that some of my comments on this thread may have legal and/or Public Relations implications. Moderators, please feel free to delete any of my posts or my quoted remarks.

Durro

[Praxis]

Cheers Durro, thanks for that.

This article is quite timely and appropriate - not saying the people in this thread have anything to fear - but there are plenty of others "out there" who are in freefall with abuse. It pays to try and remain a little circumspect :)

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/cyber-poisonpenner-hunted-down-and-sued-20100224-p3n7.html

[starr]

Those are exactly the terms Durro - hamfisted, unprofessional (where there was the obligation to be so) and definitely insulting. Apparently none of this can be acknowledged as they clamour for the high-ground. Quite stunning.

As for the claims that the comments made about Josh are annonymous - piffle - at least two of them were made by people who post under the same name at Rationalia as they do at RDF. Josh has all those details.

Otherwise, I wanted to make a statement here to quell some concerns about what might happen at the Convention. During some thinking time yesterday I realised of course that there are many terrific people who have pulled of what I expect was an horrifically enormous task of putting The Rise of Atheism together. Unlike those who precipitated the event at the heart of this thread, I have no desire to do anything that will detrimentally impact the hard work of good people. I proposed a certain response to RD when he takes the stage, but I realise that such a thing would be embarrassing for people who've nothing to do with RDF at all. I give those people my promise that I will not be any further involved with any suggested protests, nor take part in anything on the day. I will make a retraction of my suggestion over at Rationalia for the reasons outlined here. I also apologise for any angst I may have caused the organisers with my public 'call to protest'. I have nothing but enormous admiration for all involved in this terrific event.

I'm very glad to see this post Riddlemethis. *hugs*

I was feeling uncomfortable about the idea of a protest against Richard at the Convention. I certainly would not have taken part in it. The people who are organising the Convention are doing a fantastic job and the convention is bigger than the now defunct RD Forum and bigger than Richard Dawkins himself. We need to rally together as Australian Atheists and this Convention will be a perfect venue to do that. :)

[Iridescence]

PROTESTING??? *AGAINST* RICHARD?????? What the hell people?? Let's ostracise, alienate and slander the man who has had more influence on the atheist movement and the progress of scientific reason against supernatural supersition than anyone else in recent years. Let's give the fundies more ammunition! Please. I reject this action with every fibre of my being, how utterly stupid. You who would do this would be shooting yourselves in the foot. Way to see the bigger picture!

[Jin-oh Choi]

PROTESTING??? *AGAINST* RICHARD?????? What the hell people?? Let's ostracise, alienate and slander the man who has had more influence on the atheist movement and the progress of scientific reason against supernatural supersition than anyone else in recent years. Let's give the fundies more ammunition! Please. I reject this action with every fibre of my being, how utterly stupid. You who would do this would be shooting yourselves in the foot. Way to see the bigger picture!

I concur, protesting against Dawkins, because of the forums. Will only give publicity for our opposition. And undermines the great work the organisers have done.

[starr]

PROTESTING??? *AGAINST* RICHARD?????? What the hell people?? Let's ostracise, alienate and slander the man who has had more influence on the atheist movement and the progress of scientific reason against supernatural supersition than anyone else in recent years. Let's give the fundies more ammunition! Please. I reject this action with every fibre of my being, how utterly stupid. You who would do this would be shooting yourselves in the foot. Way to see the bigger picture!

Hence Riddlemethis posting that she is backing off from that idea. I think the people that were thinking of doing a protest were just caught up in the raw emotion of it all. I am intending on doing whatever I can to ensure such a protest does not go ahead.

No need to get all holier than thou about it Iridescence. ;)

[plastic]

Caught this on another forum, thought I'd bring it to the attention of the members here.

God, I understand originally you designed Earth a few short years ago in the belief it would be a warm puddle of self replicating RNA molecules. That it evolved into something more complex was neither your intention or preference. Nevertheless, that is what happened, and it has come to be very important to a lot of folk. That you would now peremptorily shut it down and plan to start over is an insult to myself and other saviours of mankind, who have put in a lot of hard yards trying to shape the place up since it's inception. I trust you will not be vengeful or wrathful at Noah scraping the site with a view to possibly hosting it elsewhere. In fact if you could see your way clear to handing over a copy of the DB, that would deeply appreciated.

[Iridescence]

Hence Riddlemethis posting that she is backing off from that idea. I think the people that were thinking of doing a protest were just caught up in the raw emotion of it all. I am intending on doing whatever I can to ensure such a protest does not go ahead.

No need to get all holier than thou about it Iridescence. ;)

Pfft. Hysteria is not the answer here. The hysterical overreaction to this is getting to me, is all!

[starr]

Everybody has an opinion, including PZ Myers (http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/02/i_so_do_not_want_to_get_sucked.php?utm_source=feed burner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+scienceblogs%2Fpharyngula+%28 Pharyngula%29).

His take, (basically that the forum is Dawkins' to direct or dispose of as he pleases), is also worth considering.

I'll be prudent and back up my forum contributions from now on.

I think everyone agrees that the forum is Dawkins' to direct or dispose of as he pleases... well the people I've spoken with do anyway. Ultimately, if RD didn't want the forum then he is totally within his rights to pull the plug.

On a personal note, it would have been nice to know that RD did not value the forum before I spent so much of my personal time moderating in it. I was under the impression I was doing a good job and was helping RD and the foundation. To be treated this way is like a kick in the guts.

An honest and open discussion with the Forum staff would have been a better way to go about it. Perhaps to say a proper thank you for all the time we put in (for no pay).

As it turns out, the forum staff are being used as scapegoats in this whole web drama. That makes me sad.

I still very much respect Richard Dawkins and his work and I am very much looking forward to hearing him speak at the convention. He is the reason I felt comfortable to 'come out' as an atheist.

[riddlemethis]

Never mind

[riddlemethis]

Pfft. Hysteria is not the answer here. The hysterical overreaction to this is getting to me, is all!

Yes, I shall accept you as my role model henceforth. :rolleyes:

[Iridescence]

Excellent. Just one more minion and my plans will come to fruition......

[edit] typing in caps on an internet forum is not hysteria, I am angry with the overreaction displayed by some people. Suggesting protesting at the GAC over the closure of an internet forum is kinda hysterical, don't you think? Calling people horrific names, withdrawing financial support, claiming that all 85000 members will now leave RD hanging high and dry is kinda hysterical. Not saying you did all that RMT, but those are some of the things I have read over the last couple of days. I am already expecting to see the religious groups protesting at the GAC, I saw a little red when I got wind of people on our side of the fence considering adding their voices over an internet forum. It will get better.

I can't help but notice in every account of what went down between the 2 admins in question and the moderator group happened *after* one of the mods went and broke a critical forum rule - don't post private communications in public. They then did exactly what they were asked not to do. For the sake of the privacy of the users of the RDF forums, the admins had every right to ask the mods not to use their private information to herd people off to other outlets. I'm sure that people will still be able to figure out who is who at other forums they will end up at without using the RDF forums for that purpose. It's a shame that the admins didn't handle this better than they did, but what exactly would you have happen now that it's all gone down?

[riddlemethis]

Excellent. Just one more minion and my plans will come to fruition......

Ah, see now I'm not feeling so special Iri. . .is this like a facebook 'Bejewelled' kind of thing?? :p

[Darwinsbulldog]

My understanding is that the erasure of the Admin log occured beforehand. Yes, I found out that an ex-Mod banned the IP addresses of Andrew and Josh as a joke and/or in protest at their heavy handed actions, but this was in response to and after several members and their entire catalogue of posts had been erased and the Admin Mod logs wiped.

One of the ex-Mods also deleted the moderators threads, due to the sensitive information placed there (such as our real names and contact details) and some of the very frank discussions that were held there. The Mod in question didn't want to let Josh or Andrew have access to that.

I read Richard's Note and yes, he makes a lot of good points. The issue from my perspective isn't with the forum's closure - it was the lies that we were told leading up to the closure, the lack of input into the new forum as promised, the casual dismissal of the entire hard working Mod team and the ham fisted way it was all handled by Josh and Andrew that pissed me off.

If Richard wants to change the focus of HIS website, then that's his perogative. But the way in which it was done was very unprofessional and insulting to many.

Durro

Originally Posted by askegg http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/forums/showthread.php?p=57204#post57204)
Incorrect. Some moderator saw fit to block the IP addresses of the administrators and erased the logs to hide their tracks. Such childish behaviour.

Actually, the Senior [Green] Moderator was me, "Darwinsbulldog"and I banned Andrew Chalkley's ordinary user account that had some privileges [such as being able to view Mod Chat]. The account in question was the "chalkers" account and not Andrew's root account. Anyone knowing the first thing about phpBB board software is that a Global Mod cannot delete a root account.

I banned him as a troll on my own bat, not consulting the other members of the mod team.

This was in response to:-
1. The banning and deleting of a Blue Mod for making a polite complaint about the RDF Forum monthly science competition.
2. The persistant, arrogant, dismissive, sarcastic and generally dishonest and late [over seven days] to some of our polite inquiries over the last few months.

It was the very first time that I had used my Mod privaledges at RDF in an inappropriate manner in two years and after 11, 491 posts.

I look after my people, and so I was prpared to break that rule just once to defend one of my junior colleagues. That was not the only attack on the staff which was unprovoked.
Richard dawkins or his root staff can do what they want with the forum as they see fit.
One would hope that they could do so with some honesty and consideration. The juvenile pranks shown by the two root admins of the forum is perhaps their only talent. They could have spent their time more productively fixing the forum search engine, and general error timeouts.

I will not repeat the long list of complaints and comments made by Durro and Peter Harrison, as I refuse to stoop as low as the supporters of Josh and Chalkers. In an electronic world, truth lies with who has root access and can can/delete or doctor documents to prove their version of events as the "true" one.

[Praxis]

I will NOT snigger at the use of the word root.
I will NOT snigger at the use of the word root.
I will NOT snigger at the use of the word root.
I will NOT snigger at the use of the word root.












:D

[Iridescence]

Bah now you've got me doing it! You're a terrible person! O_O

[Sir Patrick Crocodile]

Am I the only one who suspects that Richard Dawkins has NOTHING to do with the shutdown of those forums?

[Sir Patrick Crocodile]

Incorrect. Some moderator saw fit to block the IP addresses of the administrators and erased the logs to hide their tracks. Such childish behaviour.If you knew anything about software such as phpBB and such, you would know that only Super Administrators (or Administrators - depending on software) can erase such logs. So maybe the silly admins there misconfigured their permissions, or maybe the admins THEMSELVES erased the logs.
Read - someone leapt to the wrong conclusion.What is the correct conclusion then?
The only people deleting evidence are those who maliciously attack the RDF.Such as those who deleted ADMIN and MOD logs. Hmmmmmmmmm... ;)
Do you think they might be busy right now and unable to answer requests?That's similar to what the Victorian Government said regarding funding for the convention.

[Iridescence]

I suspect that before this there were probably discussions and decisions on the future of the forum between him and his staff, but no, he wasn't the one there with his finger on the red button. And he certainly doesn't personally deserve the kind of vitriol I've seen directed to him from various sources who all seem to think it's all his fault. I've been a member of various forums for 20 years now, and I've seen this happen time and time again. It's a shame that a vocal few must give everyone a bad name.

[Fearless]

Am I the only one who suspects that Richard Dawkins has NOTHING to do with the shutdown of those forums?

I am sure he knows the forums are 'currently undergoing upgrades' but may be very much unaware of how it has transpired.

Where I work decisions are made from a very high level and branch downwards... when it gets down to the people actually making the change it is purely up to their management styles as to how it gets done.

The guys up top know it is happening but seldom know how it is being done or how it is going because they don't get involved. They just know it will be done.

In my place of work it is the little guy who typically gets screwed over. There is no open channel of communication to the people requesting the change from the lower ranks. Expendable assets in my case.

[Sir Patrick Crocodile]

@Fearless: That might explain a lot. Do you work as a systems analyst or something similar? I can see exactly where you are coming from.

[Fearless]

I am pushing myself away from being a cog in the machine as much as possible Croc... I consider myself well qualified to do a number of things but I cannot trust most management groups I have worked in because many are incompetent and have not the first clue how to treat and work with people... so I choose not to associate myself with them.

So I am actually an over qualified forklift driver (by choice) in a large retailer by day, so I can work hard to build up my own business by night.

... and I am slowly getting there ;)

But hey, this is not about me :p

[Praxis]

Bah now you've got me doing it! You're a terrible person! O_O
Give in to your inner 10-year-old boy :D

[riddlemethis]

Excellent. Just one more minion and my plans will come to fruition......

[edit] typing in caps on an internet forum is not hysteria, I am angry with the overreaction displayed by some people. Suggesting protesting at the GAC over the closure of an internet forum is kinda hysterical, don't you think? Calling people horrific names, withdrawing financial support, claiming that all 85000 members will now leave RD hanging high and dry is kinda hysterical. Not saying you did all that RMT, but those are some of the things I have read over the last couple of days. I am already expecting to see the religious groups protesting at the GAC, I saw a little red when I got wind of people on our side of the fence considering adding their voices over an internet forum. It will get better.

I can't help but notice in every account of what went down between the 2 admins in question and the moderator group happened *after* one of the mods went and broke a critical forum rule - don't post private communications in public. They then did exactly what they were asked not to do. For the sake of the privacy of the users of the RDF forums, the admins had every right to ask the mods not to use their private information to herd people off to other outlets. I'm sure that people will still be able to figure out who is who at other forums they will end up at without using the RDF forums for that purpose. It's a shame that the admins didn't handle this better than they did, but what exactly would you have happen now that it's all gone down?

Ah, and here I was thinking we'd managed a gracious way to sidestep this conversation.

I think your use of the word "horrific" to describe the things Josh was called is a glowing example of the tone in which most of the comments made about him were made when they are in full context of the thread in which they appeared. Was invective empolyed? Yep. Was it juvenille? Yep, deliberately so. Frustrated? Definitely. Hyperbole tends to creep in when something's got your goat, doesn't it. . .I mean horrific is a little girl being stolen and murdered by her parents facebook friend. Calling someone a turd in the mouth is not.

Withdrawing financial support for RDF. Yes I will be. But to be clear this is the straw that broke the camels back for me. I just don't measure him as being worthy of my support any more & it is his name on over the door. I will happily discuss this with you at Conference, should you be interested & we have the chance to meet. I will be directing my charity to those with a more deft hand in the future - he's hardly a lone voice on the secular fundraising horizon. Indeed, the Australian Atheists will get the whole pie this year, not just some of it.

Now as to my suggested protest. Did you miss the bit about it being silent? I thought greeting him with the back of our heads as a metaphor for the people who'd worked hard on his behalf being treated as though they are faceless (& hence apparently meaningless), would be appropriate. What I forgot was that this event IS NOT his gig & that the people who are responsible for it coming to fruition need not bear the brunt of RD's actions. . .and anyone who thinks that RD is not heavily involved in the things which bear his name are grossly miscalculating him. He's a few things, but stupid isn't one of them.

Additionally, none of this is about the changes to the forum. It is entirely about how the people who actually ran it in the day to day, on their own time, in support of RD's mission & how those people were shat upon from a great height by an incompetent camera-man whose building an empire off the coat tails of somebody famous. RD shouldn't have sent a boy to do a mans job. Should have done it himself, and ensured the people who deserved it were in the loop b/c they would have supported him & kept a lid on any shenanigans the way they always did.

As for your interpretation of the events, I am very clear about the time-line of all of this and we'll have to agree to disagree here. This train wreck is not the fault of anybody but RD & Josh.

[Loki]

mmmmmm.....pie.

[Iridescence]

I agree horrific is not the right word. I was thinking more nasty, childish, horrible, mean, you know, unnecessary overreaction to the changes, and the way they were handled. I agree that the admins who did this didn't do it with the best soft people skills they could muster, and I agree that somewhere along the line, the mods who were treated poorly deserve an apology. I don't agree with forum mods anywhere abusing their rights, or posting private communications in public and I cringe every time I see it happening because it always means massive forum fallout. Neither group is entirely innocent here.

I did miss the silent part about the protest suggestion. I respect that you have decided not to do it, however the dissent is out there and I am fully expecting someone to go and ruin it. I will be so disappointed if that does happen.

Unfortunately I can't attend the GAC this year as much as I would have loved to, I have other obligations to attend to, but I'll be following it closely and hopefully there will be other opportunities in the future.

As for RD doing the job himself. The man is a biology professor, not a website administrator. I guess he trusted JT to do the job of running the website and the discussion area so that he can get about the business of attending conventions, doing interviews, writing books. I dunno. Maybe he knew JT would handle it like this, maybe he didn't. Who knows? I run my own business, and trust the entire administration of my website to my husband. If he makes changes, he makes them for a reason and there is no need to bring me in on most of the decisions at all since I know bugger all about it, since I make art, not websites. Just thinking aloud, really.

Anyway.... truce?

[Fearless]

Ah, and here I was thinking we'd managed a gracious way to sidestep this conversation.

Anyway.... truce?
:cool:

[Darwinsbulldog]

Let's hope there's cooler 'weather" at the conf! :D

[riddlemethis]

Truce! Not that I thought we had a conflict!

I don't think anything untoward will happen at the convention. Cooler heads will prevail.

You know, RD has built himself as a brand. It would be a cop-out on his part to say 'I'm just a biology professor' (retired actually - he hasn't done science in a long time), by way of abrogating his part in this. He is acutely aware of the nature of the forum which operated under his name, and definitely not all of it was admirable, but he had expressed in the past that he felt it was important.

As a business owner also, and especially where I've had people working hard on my behalf, I have always endeavoured to be consultative where changes I intended to make would affect thier lives. There is something seriously wrong if RD either a) couldn't anticipate that this was a huge change (effectively sacking a whole team of people after assuring them they'd be involved in a process of change) which needed to be deftly handled OR b) that he thinks JT is capable of deft handling (he's proved before he is not).

If all we were talking about here is the presentation of a set of information, I'd agree with you, but we aren't - it's far more complicated than that as any forum admin can attest to. All I'm suggesting is that RD proofed a few hundred words on a page before they were released & put his name at the bottom. I'm pretty sure there's time to do that between signings.

[Iridescence]

/me hands out some premature mini chocolate Zombie-Jesus-Day eggs. Because what is not improved by chocolate, after all? :)

[Praxis]

/me hands out some premature mini chocolate Zombie-Jesus-Day eggs. Because what is not improved by chocolate, after all? :)
And the shops are full of them at the moment!

Mmmmm ... Cadbury caramel eggs ...... :D

[Atrax Robustus]

Calilasseia (http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=75&t=9144&start=0) has posted an open letter to Richard Dawkins.

I think he supports the opinions of the rest of the mods . . .

I don't take kindly to dispensing two and a half years of loyal service, writing the best part of two million words supporting his campaign, only to be told that I have been deemed surplus to requirements by the decree of a snotty-nosed little twerp whose mindset is manifestly pre-pubescent.

[Praxis]

I guess Cali is over at Rationalia. Oh well - I hope I see him again around the traps.

I admire the Blue Buterfly tremendously.

Thanks for that Atrax.

Oh that's pure Cali! What a gift he has with language. Gotta love him :)

[starr]

Peter Harrison has posted an update on his blog. Well worth a read.
http://realityismyreligion.wordpress.com/2010/02/25/update-on-dawkins-forum-closure/

[Goldenmane]

Thanks love *hug*

Vikki's here - she's lurking online and I expect Durro and Starr to put in an appearance.

Hey, we might get Goldenmane! Oh hang on ... :p

Meanwhile, will be lovely to see you around here more, so there's the silver lining :D

I'm here.

I'm pretty much done with Internet activism at the moment, though. I'm going back to hitting things and actually getting some real writing done. Or something.

I look forward to meeting some of you in March. Time and Dick's behaviour from here on in will dictate my future opinion of him. My current view is available in the Rule #3 thread at rationalia, if anyone cares.

If anyone wants to contact me, I'm sure you can find me.

*hugs* to all my compatriots who might want them.

See you round.

[starr]

I'm here.

I'm pretty much done with Internet activism at the moment, though. I'm going back to hitting things and actually getting some real writing done. Or something.

I look forward to meeting some of you in March. Time and Dick's behaviour from here on in will dictate my future opinion of him. My current view is available in the Rule #3 thread at rationalia, if anyone cares.

If anyone wants to contact me, I'm sure you can find me.

*hugs* to all my compatriots who might want them.

See you round.

Ahhhh... there's the grumpy old bugger we know and love. Looking forward to meeting you at the Convention.... I'll take a hug thanks. :p

[riddlemethis]

Peter Harrison has posted an update on his blog. Well worth a read.
http://realityismyreligion.wordpress...forum-closure/

Yes, except that Peter seems to think the quoted insults were directed at Richard, which they most definitely were not. They were directed at the kid with the rude face-fur & the empathy by-pass.

[davo]

I have an archive up at http://nomasters.org/rdf but the stylesheet is broken atm won't be able to fix till weekend, in melb tomorrow.

[Made Of Stars]

Correction time.

Incorrect. Some moderator saw fit to block the IP addresses of the administrators and erased the logs to hide their tracks. Such childish behaviour.
Wrong. As explained elsewhere, darwinsbulldog banned the 'chalkers' account after Mazille had his entire account deleted.

Note that it was one of the staff who re-instated chalkers:

Topsy [IP address deleted] Tue Feb 23, 2010 9:37 am Unbanned user
» chalkers

The people who were responsible for blocking administrators had their accounted deleted.
Inconsistent with your previous comment ("erased the logs to hide their tracks"), and wrong.

The only members of staff who had their accounts deleted were Mazille and darwinsbulldog. Neither of them are admins, and neither are able to delete admin IPs, nor delete admin logs. Other members of staff (including myself) deleted their posts out of concern that their personal details and confidential discussions about members' marriage break-ups, suicide threats, and so on would be picked up by database retrieval software that ex-members have been using to recover forum material.

Read - someone leapt to the wrong conclusion.
Indeed. Don't believe what you're spoon-fed.

The only people deleting evidence are those who maliciously attack the RDF.
That would be Andrew Chalkley and Josh Timonen in 'admin' mode. The darlings thought they could cover things up, not realising we could still capture what they were up to. In the sample log files below, the IP address is Andrew Chalkley's; the times are AEST:


admin 87.102.119.202 Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:52 am Cleared admin log
admin 87.102.119.202 Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:42 am Purged cache
admin 87.102.119.202 Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:40 am Cleared admin log
admin 87.102.119.202 Tue Feb 23, 2010 12:33 am Cleared admin log
admin 87.102.119.202 Tue Feb 23, 2010 12:32 am Altered post settings
admin 87.102.119.202 Tue Feb 23, 2010 12:32 am Altered private message settings
admin 87.102.119.202 Tue Feb 23, 2010 12:31 am Altered avatar settings
admin 87.102.119.202 Tue Feb 23, 2010 12:31 am Altered board features
admin 87.102.119.202 Tue Feb 23, 2010 12:30 am Altered board features
admin 87.102.119.202 Tue Feb 23, 2010 12:28 am Purged cache
admin 87.102.119.202 Tue Feb 23, 2010 12:24 am Cleared admin log
admin 87.102.119.202 Tue Feb 23, 2010 12:17 am Altered private message settings
Sufficient?

Note that I've edited out Josh Timonen's similar actions against members (and cover-ups) as it seems to be chalkers you're getting your info from.

One has to wonder why two people who will (ultimately) be the only ones able to view these logs would delete them as they go?

Do you think they might be busy right now and unable to answer requests?
As I've shown above, they've been very busy.

As staff, we'd attempted to liaise with Andrew over the past few weeks and months. His lack of understanding of the forum was quite plain; his and Josh's disregard for the staff and membership similarly so.

Andrew might be your friend, but he's lying-for-Jesus, and grabbing every dustbin lid, breadbasket and small animal he can get his hands on to cover his arse.

Made of Stars
Former RD.net Forum Admin
Sydney

[askegg]

You seem awfully sure of your facts for someone who was not involved behind the scenes. Seems a bit odd. Almost like you are being fed information from Josh and Andrew to post as counter-claims to what the former RD Forum staff are saying.

Who are you and where do you fit into this whole thing? :rolleyes:

You believe I am here as a puppet to spread misinformation? Why? Because I have a different view on this event?

I do not disagree that the whole thing might have been handled better, but the moderators reaction has been incredibly childish and nothing but damaging the the forum, the RDF, and the atheist community at large. THAT is why the forums were switched off early.

I understand people feel a sense of ownership when they have put so much time and effort into a web site, but the stark facts of the matter are they are NOT the owners of the site. If the owners want to take things in a new direction, that's their business.

[askegg]

My understanding is that the erasure of the Admin log occured beforehand. Yes, I found out that an ex-Mod banned the IP addresses of Andrew and Josh as a joke and/or in protest at their heavy handed actions, but this was in response to and after several members and their entire catalogue of posts had been erased and the Admin Mod logs wiped.


I believe the members who had their accounts terminated were to the ones who explicitly did exactly what they were asked NOT to do.


One of the ex-Mods also deleted the moderators threads, due to the sensitive information placed there (such as our real names and contact details) and some of the very frank discussions that were held there. The Mod in question didn't want to let Josh or Andrew have access to that.


That's non-sensical. Firstly, if they do not want that information available to admins, don't post it in the forums. Second, do don't think admins keep backups? What the hell?


...the casual dismissal of the entire hard working Mod team and the ham fisted way it was all handled by Josh and Andrew that pissed me off.


I have no issue there, but it's never nice or easy to tell people they will not be required moving forward.

[Made Of Stars]

You believe I am here as a puppet to spread misinformation? Why? Because I have a different view on this event?
No, because you're spreading misinformation.

I do not disagree that the whole thing might have been handled better, but the moderators reaction has been incredibly childish and nothing but damaging the the forum, the RDF, and the atheist community at large. THAT is why the forums were switched off early.
As demonstrated, you know fuck-all about 'the moderators' reaction'.

There were two posts by moderators questioning the actions, which lead to one of their accounts being DELETED. Not suspended. Their account and thousands of posts were DELETED. All the other blue mods were demoted to stamp on any further dissent.

My understanding is that the forum was locked after a discussion thread opened in the Tech Support forum (now deleted by 'admin'), and people started asking 'WTF'?

I understand people feel a sense of ownership when they have put so much time and effort into a web site, but the stark facts of the matter are they are NOT the owners of the site. If the owners want to take things in a new direction, that's their business.
You are 100% right. But the outrage is at the gross incompetence with which this has been handled, not the forum direction.*

*Addit: And this has happened before. The handling of the 'October Revolution' lead to Richard Dawkins issuing an apology for the mismanagement. It seems no lessons were learned.

[Sciwoman]

You believe I am here as a puppet to spread misinformation? Why? Because I have a different view on this event?

I do not disagree that the whole thing might have been handled better, but the moderators reaction has been incredibly childish and nothing but damaging the the forum, the RDF, and the atheist community at large. THAT is why the forums were switched off early.

I understand people feel a sense of ownership when they have put so much time and effort into a web site, but the stark facts of the matter are they are NOT the owners of the site. If the owners want to take things in a new direction, that's their business.
No one disagrees that it is Richard Dawkins's site to do with at he pleases. However, the way it was handled is a textbooks example of how not to do it.

I personally would not have been so upset expect for the fact that almost everything the staff was told was going to happen was entirely different from what was announced was going to happen - and the subsequent actions of the site admin and site tech when faced with questions and disagreement by the membership in general.

(BTW, I'm also an RDF former admin.)

[askegg]

There seems to be a few ex-admins here with more information than I am privy to.

I admit to not knowing all the fact, but at this stage I am not sure anyone could claim they know exactly what went on, who did what, and why.

Nevertheless, I retract my accusations and shall retire to bed (being 1am here).

I do hope that everyone can get over their differences here and become part of the community surrounding the new system (whatever it is).

[Made Of Stars]

:)

(Where's the toasting with a glass of wine smiley? ;) )

[Sciwoman]

There seems to be a few ex-admins here with more information than I am privy to.

I admit to not knowing all the fact, but at this stage I am not sure anyone could claim they know exactly what went on, who did what, and why.

Nevertheless, I retract my accusations and shall retire to bed (being 1am here).

I do hope that everyone can get over their differences here and become part of the community surrounding the new system (whatever it is).
No hard feelings. I hope the same thing. :)

I already was part of another forum, so I had a place to land (although losing the old RDF forum has hurt). However, I might make this place a second home of sorts - if no one minds an American atheist, ex-fundamentalist christian, ex-catholic, ex-RDF admin joining your community. :D

[Made Of Stars]

I certainly don't, but what do I know? I've only got 20 posts to my name... :D

(Bye-bye to the 8,000 I had at RD.net :rolleyes: )

[Sciwoman]

I certainly don't, but what do I know? I've only got 20 posts to my name... :D

(Bye-bye to the 8,000 I had at RD.net :rolleyes: )
I was thinking about the folks who came here. It may be a while before I can forgive and forget with Josh and Co. ;)

[Sciwoman]

I think we can handle that ;)

Welcome all ex RDF members. I remember you made me welcome over there when we had our DDoS attack and we stole Praxis (Aesthetic Atheist) off you so we're practically family... just don't talk about smilies.. (Starr is sorting that (http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/forums/showthread.php?t=4061))
Thanks. I think I can forgive you for stealing her. Smilies are the least of my concerns right now. ;)

I do eventually need to go introduce myself. :)

[Praxis]

I think we can handle that ;)

Welcome all ex RDF members. I remember you made me welcome over there when we had our DDoS attack and we stole Praxis (Aesthetic Atheist) off you so we're practically family... just don't talk about smilies.. (Starr is sorting that (http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/forums/showthread.php?t=4061))
I promise you I was not abducted! I went willingly! And now I love them and will never leave ...



(Stockholm syndrome anyone? :D )

But srsly folks - this thread has been excellent. Seeing people talk through it and cooler heads beginning to prevail is indeed a most excellent start to things.

And yes, where IS the glass of wine cheers smiley? ;)

[Sciwoman]

I promise you I was not abducted! I went willingly! And now I love them and will never leave ...



(Stockholm syndrome anyone? :D )

But srsly folks - this thread has been excellent. Seeing people talk through it and cooler heads beginning to prevail is indeed a most excellent start to things.

And yes, where IS the glass of wine cheers smiley? ;)

Yes, yes, yes, I believe you. :D

It is good to see these things being discussed at all. We thank you for allowing us to do so here since we cannot over there. Emotions are still running a bit high, but cooler heads will prevail because cooler heads can make their points better. :)

Okay, now where is that intro forum? :)

[Sciwoman]

About here (http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
Thanks. With my sense of direction I might have wound up in Hong Kong. :D

[Durro]

Here is the response directly to Richard Dawkins on behalf of the ex-staff of the forum, penned by Topsy. As you can see, they're very irrational, inflammatory and unreasonable people.

:rolleyes:

Dear Richard
We hope you will find time to read this letter, which is from all the forum staff.

We are all deeply saddened that the forum will be deleted in 28 days time. In just over 3 years, it has grown to become the busiest atheist forum on
the Internet. On average since last October, the forum has been getting 3,000 posts per day, of which about 2,000 per day are focused on science,
reason and your work. The front page average is a fraction of that at 200 - 300. The social posts on the forum only comprise about 1/10 of all posts per
day so there is a great deal of substance being discarded.

Staff were told that the science and reason forum content would be migrated to the new site and we offered to help with this. Then 2 days ago, we were told that there was a change of plan and all the forum content would be deleted in 30 days. Members have been told that they can copy their posts and repost them on the new site. This is complete nonsense because it isn't individual posts that make up the forum, it's the discussion threads that are significant and members don't have the ability to migrate whole threads across. That's what the staff were going to do for them. This is now
not going to happen and over 3 years worth of threads debunking creationism & woo, challenging theism, supporting new atheists etc will be wiped out.

Andrew and Josh have now announced that the forum has been made 'read-only' due to the inappropriate actions of staff. This is 'spin' at its finest as it fails to acknowledge that their own inappropriate actions resulted in this debacle in the first place. The announcement that the forum was shut down because some staff posted the letter sent to them and made some public complaints is nonsense. The letter was exactly the same as the one posted publicly to the members with the addition of letting staff know that their services wouldn't be required at the new website. They also told staff what they shouldn't do:

"Please understand that this transition is going to be a lot of work for us. I'm sure as you read this, you will have a lot of questions and concerns. We also know that this is a change from what we had been discussing previously. This announcement does not require a response, but we wanted you to be aware. Please do not email Richard with complaints, we have discussed this transition thoroughly with him, and he is currently on tour in Australia and New Zealand. Please do not attempt to inflame the users, start any petitions, or "relocate" groups of users to a separate forum. Do not use any of the data held by the foundation (such as email addresses) through the control panel to cause any trouble. Any behavior of this kind will not be tolerated. We don't expect you to do these things, but we say all of this only to discourage any well-intentioned moves that would only frustrate the situation."

We decided to post this letter on the forum as it explained succinctly that staff wouldn't be required and also let people know that they shouldn't
expect staff to take any action on their behalf. Andrew and Josh removed the letter and they could have also removed the staff's permissions as they said they didn't trust staff anymore. They didn't have to make the forum 'read-only' for everybody in order to gag the staff. The fact is that they needed the staff to deal with all the complaints that would inevitably have been thrown at the forum for the next 30 days. In other words, they expected the staff to give up their free time to act as police and lavatory cleaners for a month, without a word of dissent themselves, and then just stand aside and watch the forum they'd worked so hard for be deleted. Not much to ask was it?

Since their announcement, you have made one yourself entitled "outrage" which contains copies of some insulting comments about Josh. None of these comments came from the RD forum. They were all posted on various other websites after the forum was locked. Someone has harvested these quote-mines from other websites and presented them to you as justification for locking the forum. Your announcement also contradicts the admin announcement which says that the reason the forum was locked was due to the staff.They are also saying that they aren't trying to stop people from going off into other forums but right from the start, they prevented members from having any links/information in their signatures and changed the PM system to make it virtually unworkable so that members can't contact each other easily.

Andrew and Josh could have handled this so much better if they had taken up the offer we made a while ago to advise them on how to make the transition. They don't have any leadership skills or experience but several of us on the staff do this professionally and have years of experience managing change with large and diverse groups of people. This offer was ignored and instead, they have provided a textbook example of how not to do it. This also includes putting the blame on people for reacting badly to their ill-conceived actions. The fact that they either didn't expect such a reaction or just didn't care, serves to emphasise their ignorance of how to work with large groups of people and how to manage change.

We have all worked so hard to support your mission because we passionately believe in it. You and your work have been our inspiration to keep going on days when we were verbally abused and threatened by trolls. The staff are highly intelligent people but we were prepared to spend hours of our own time doing low-level and mundane moderating tasks to keep the forum organised, facilitate focused discussions and solve people's technical problems. We were also able to use our skills and expertise in fostering a sense of community and ensuring that all people could post there, free from homophobic, sexist or racist abuse. That's a significant part of why it has become the most popular atheist forum on the Internet because it's a lively, challenging and supportive environment.

The Foundation's decision to remove the forum is one we deeply regret but we acknowledge that as volunteers, it's not our concern. However, we could have used our skills and expertise to help develop the new discussion area, transfer content over and manage the transition for the membership as smoothly as possible. Andrew and Josh rejected that offer and as we were told recently that we weren't allowed to contact you about any forum matters, we weren't able to make that offer to you personally.

At the moment, we feel deflated and dismayed while we watch the destruction of such a successful forum but despite that, we continue to wish you well and we sincerely hope that the new website is successful in achieving the Foundation's goals, which is what were striving for with the forum.

Sincerely
The forum staff

Copied to Mike & Liz Cornwell and the Foundation Trustees

That pretty much sums up the feeling of the ex-Mods.

[Sciwoman]

Yes it does, Durro, yes it does.

[Lee]

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article7041878.ece

Richard Dawkins is accustomed to provoking the wrath of religious communities, but now a schism seems to have opened up within the atheist community who make up his fan-base.

The split occurred after he announced that a discussion section on his website, considered one of the busiest online atheist forums, would in future be tightly moderated and “irrelevant postings and frivolous gossip” would no longer be allowed.

The change was scheduled for next month but such was the torrent of abuse after the announcement that the forum had to be locked down, deepening the rift between Professor Dawkins and his 85,000 online fans.
Writing on RichardDawkins.net (http://richarddawkins.net/) yesterday, in a posting entitled “Outrage”, he said that there was “something rotten” in internet culture and pledged to rid his website of its abusive element.

“Imagine seeing your face described by an anonymous poster, as ‘a slack-jawed turd-in-the-mouth mug’,” he wrote. “Surely there has to be something wrong with people who can resort to such over-the-top language, overreacting so spectacularly to something so trivial.
“Even some of those with more temperate language are responding to the proposed changes in a way that is little short of hysterical.”

The cloak of anonymity under which many people contributed to discussions had led to a culture of extreme language that would not be possible if people wrote under their name.

Unwilling to be silenced, however, the members of the website and the 15 moderators, some of whom worked unpaid, vented their own outrage elsewhere.

“A lot of people have lost respect for Dawkins after this, although I do still support the work that he does,” said Peter Harrison, a former moderator.
“Thousands of loyal, intelligent, rational forum members have been misrepresented as a bunch of foul-mouthed, vitriolic thugs by the man who so inspired them.”

Another former fan said: “It may sound ridiculous to those not involved with online communities, but I feel hurt and displaced. It was like coming home to find the locks have been changed. My respect for Richard’s work is still intact but my respect for him as a person is in tatters.”
The forum typically attracted 3,000 postings per day, on subjects ranging from science to religion and ethics.

Professor Dawkins now faces a confrontation with his adversaries at the Global Atheist Convention in Melbourne in two weeks.

He denied that the forum was closing but said that it was being improved. “The forum is going to be more tightly controlled and will be under more central control. So it won’t be available for anyone who wants to sound off freely,” he said.

He conceded that there was a good case for anonymity for some contributors and such contributions would still be allowed.
“I can see why people in America who lost their faith and do not want their families to know, or perhaps people of an Islamic background who have lost their faith or become Christian, have every reason to be anonymous,” he said.

The forum’s implosion has been jumped on by Christian groups as a sign that the Dawkins community is not as free-thinking as it is claimed.

[nari]

It will be interesting to hear about the GAC audience's general reaction to RD - if there will be a sour intonation to questions and answers.

nari

[Logic]

I hope not. As a non-RDer, I am feeling slightly awkward about the whole thing. Wanting to support ex-forum admins/contributors, but not having any reason myself to be miffed at Dawkins.

[starr]

A new forum has been set up for RDF refugees who would like to check it out.

It's http://www.rationalskepticism.org/index.php
http://i559.photobucket.com/albums/ss33/starr23_photos/file-5-1.jpg

(ps. if this is considered spamming let me know, I thought it would be OK to mention given the current circumstances :))

[GenericBox]

I don't understand where RD himself has gone wrong - or why this would ruin anyones "reputation" let alone just his.

For me, it was just a business decision - and doesn't seem to have much personal malice in it. It doesn't seem that it was just a case of - "I don't like the swearing going on, it insults me, so I'm shutting you down" (even though I would still be fine with that). It seems more like a "Your behaviour is not an image we want associated with our brand, so to minimise any negative ramifications of individuals opinions, we will be limiting the exposure of them."

Nothing wrong with that.

Forums, whether or not intended - form apart of a website, organisations and in this case persons reputation / public image.

Even here, everything posted ultimately reflects upon the AFA, and the AFA must take responsibility for everything posted here. Regardless of who originally posts it - anonymous or otherwise - everything here is as good to the public as if the AFA said it themselves.

I am a monogamist 'forumer'. I tried to join others but this is pretty much it. As some of the opinions have expressed - this is a second home. But if the AFA forums closed, or were made inaccessible (Like when I was banned for a whole 24 hours lol) - my opinion shouldn't, nor did it - change for the AFA. I would be disappointed for sure, but this is their property - and I have no authority whatsoever to tell the moderators/owners how to maintain it.

These people that are saying that they their opinion of RD is in tatters are just plain shortsighted and petty. If you really think of RD the man, as merely 'the forum host', then you really didn't know him to form any sort of opinion to begin with.

[SchizoDeluxe]

I guess since it's his name attached to the site and forum, he has every right to do what he wants with it. I don't agree with censorship of any kind but if he doesn't like the way things are, he has every right to change it.

[DanDare]

I've just signed up over there. Its home for my Dawkinsish personality mode, I'm at home there. I haven't really lost RDF I seem to have simply gained Atheist Nexus and Rationalia so I never have to actually go to sleep any more. Bwahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! :cool:

[Dan]

I guess since it's his name attached to the site and forum, he has every right to do what he wants with it. I don't agree with censorship of any kind but if he doesn't like the way things are, he has every right to change it.

By Internet standards the forum it was pretty tame but because Richard Dawkins has his name so extensively integrated into the forum I was surprised by some of the discussion that was allowed to take place.

I feel the best approach would have been to shift the forum onto it's own domain and standalone site so that it is no longer integrated with RichardDawkins.net, I'm certain there would be people prepared to take it over if necessary. Personally, that's the approach I would have taken. It's just such a waste to lose such an active forum.

[Sciwoman]

I guess since it's his name attached to the site and forum, he has every right to do what he wants with it. I don't agree with censorship of any kind but if he doesn't like the way things are, he has every right to change it.
I've not come across a single person who disputes that Dawkins can do what he likes with his site. The issue has been with the way it was handled. It is a case study in how not to deal with such things.

(I'm an ex-admin of the Richard Dawkins forum, just so you know.)

[Praxis]

Peter Harrison has succinctly explained things again in his blog:

http://realityismyreligion.wordpress.com/2010/02/26/my-reaction-to-the-overreaction/

[Sciwoman]

Peter Harrison has succinctly explained things again in his blog:

http://realityismyreligion.wordpress.com/2010/02/26/my-reaction-to-the-overreaction/
Thanks for posting that, Praxis. I had forgotten all about it.

[Fearless]

I feel the best approach would have been to shift the forum onto it's own domain and standalone site so that it is no longer integrated with RichardDawkins.net, I'm certain there would be people prepared to take it over if necessary. Personally, that's the approach I would have taken. It's just such a waste to lose such an active forum.

Agree 100%

[Praxis]

I feel the best approach would have been to shift the forum onto it's own domain and standalone site so that it is no longer integrated with RichardDawkins.net, I'm certain there would be people prepared to take it over if necessary. Personally, that's the approach I would have taken. It's just such a waste to lose such an active forum.
That's been done now - rationalskepticism.org - basically, they've got the band back together :)

I joined - it gives me a place where I know I can connect with others I know/used to know from RDF, without having to go Rationalia, which I really don't like, despite being extremely fond of many people there.

Anyway, life is moving on, as it always does.

[Veronique]

Lucky all of you who will be in Melbourne from the 12th onwards. I hope it is a wonderful Convention and that no unnecessary sour stuff happens from apparently disgruntled RDFers, of which I am not one (disgruntled, that is:)).

It is starting to settle down and people's knickers are seemingly less knotted. The RDF forum is still there as read-only and posts can be copied and saved on blogs. In fact that has already been done. The lost posts mean that posters weren't keeping what they considered their valuable posts on their hard drives. Silly - hard lesson to learn. RDF supplied a free archive for thousands of posts - it should never have been seen as the only record.

Still, the contretemps are slowing, which is good. I hope Josh and RD are treated well at the Convention, Q&A and elsewhere.

Neither Yorker nor I will be able to make it and besides the tickets appear to have sold out. Congratulations. Even if we could get there, we would be sweltering outside!!! It is still snowing here in Scotland!!

I hope DVDs will be made poste haste for those of us who can't get back to Oz. I am so looking forward to viewing this the first Global Atheist Convention in Oz. Just wonderful.

Again, have a marvellous Convention.

Cheers
V

[Praxis]

Hey thanks Veronique! I do know of one person who is making the trip from Bonny Scotland, so you will at least be represented :D

I posted this on my Atheist Nexus blog just before (I very rarely blog) and I thought I'd post it here as well. It covers my thoughts about potential problems on the Sunday:

************************

I, for one, will be utterly appalled and disgusted if anyone does
anything stupid, rude or disrespectful when Professor Dawkins takes the
stage at the convention. People need to remember that RD's influence and
popularity are not just confined to the internet. There are actually
people out there in the real world who know of him and admire his work.
People who have no connections to forums or internet communities and who are utterly unaware of what has happened recently and no doubt couldn't
care less. I know quite a few such people who are attending and of
course there will be lots more. It's supremely arrogant to think for one
moment that the death of the forum has impacted everyone who will
attend. It hasn't. I hope that all attendees are grown-up enough to be
able to clearly separate the man and his work, and why he is speaking at
the Convention, from the RD Forum debacle. They are separate issues
entirely. I do not want to see anyone using the forum issue as a reason
to do anything objectionable.

I hope when he takes the stage that he is greeted with enthusiasm, respect and
admiration for the work he has done, both in his professional field and
also for highlighing atheism and letting people know that it is okay not
to believe.

There's also no filming allowed inside, other than the official crew
recording. So if anyone does film and upload to YouTube, then hopefully
that person or persons will be dealt with appropriately.

To finish up, I was a long-time RD forum member. Years in fact. I joined
when the place was barely 12 months old. I know lots of people there
and was a big part of the community. I also know lots of the former Mod
team, some personally. So don't be thinking that I don't know all the
issues here or am unaware of this and that because that would be a bad
assumption.

I expect everyone to behave properly and with respect at the Convention.
Everyone has paid good money to attend and no one will want what may
may well be their one and only chance to hear this amazing scientific
mind speak interupted by peevish and disgruntled former forumites. I
would like to think that we are better than that.

I only hope I am proved right. So many have invested so much in this
convention - I would hate to see it ruined by a few who can't separate
the issues and who aren't mature enough to handle their grievances any
better than by way of public nuisance.

I want to maintain my excitement and anticipation of the GAC. I hate that I'm even having to worry about it potentially being spoiled by some.

[Seamus]

I'm bemused..

It's RDF is an internet site.

I belong to several, and change regularly,leaving at around 12 months,when I get bored with ever present dominant clique of regulars and/ or begin treating the forum as real.


Professor Dawkins' reaction to what had become of HIS site was pretty much what one would expect from a somewhat naive intellectual, accustomed to the [overtly] civilised world of academia.

The hysterical reaction of some forum members was the tediously predictable response of rather shallow people who were under the mistaken impression that Professor Dawkins owed them something.

OR Dawkins is an arsehole? So fucking what? How does that invalidate anything he says? He's just an ordinary,imperfect person. His purpose on earth is not to meet the expectations of others.Deal with it.

A word on volunteer moderators; People become volunteers for all kinds of reasons most of them selfish. Moderators from Dawkins' site getting their panties in a bunch is pure humbug. [mostly]

[Chrys Stevenson]

I think Seamus makes an excellent point. Dawkins was interviewed on Andrew Denton elder's programme and came across as a not very interesting, not particularly likeable person. I not only think that doesn't matter one iota, I think maybe it's a good thing.

Dawkins is not a guru, or a movie star, or a celebrity. He is a scientist.

He is not there for us to idolise or be star-struck by - his function is to explain science for the lay person - something he does beautifully and with a wit and humour that wasn't displayed in the Denton interview.

Putting any atheist 'leader' up on a pedestal is dangerous. Dawkins is just a person like anyone else. Like anyone else he gets grumpy and makes decisions that piss people off. With regard to the RD forum thing, he's not a PR expert either (obviously!) but why should we expect him to be?

So, we have found that Dawkins is flawed. As Seamus says, that makes absolutely no difference whatsoever to the value of his work or the importance of his message. And, as always, even Dawkins' work should be read with a critical eye - he would expect no less.

[Seamus]

@Chrys


What a brilliant, insightful,sensitive reply. :D




(translation; we are simpatico on this)

[Darwinsbulldog]

Hey thanks Veronique! I do know of one person who is making the trip from Bonny Scotland, so you will at least be represented :D

I posted this on my Atheist Nexus blog just before (I very rarely blog) and I thought I'd post it here as well. It covers my thoughts about potential problems on the Sunday:

************************

I, for one, will be utterly appalled and disgusted if anyone does
anything stupid, rude or disrespectful when Professor Dawkins takes the
stage at the convention. People need to remember that RD's influence and
popularity are not just confined to the internet. There are actually
people out there in the real world who know of him and admire his work.
People who have no connections to forums or internet communities and who are utterly unaware of what has happened recently and no doubt couldn't
care less. I know quite a few such people who are attending and of
course there will be lots more. It's supremely arrogant to think for one
moment that the death of the forum has impacted everyone who will
attend. It hasn't. I hope that all attendees are grown-up enough to be
able to clearly separate the man and his work, and why he is speaking at
the Convention, from the RD Forum debacle. They are separate issues
entirely. I do not want to see anyone using the forum issue as a reason
to do anything objectionable.

I hope when he takes the stage that he is greeted with enthusiasm, respect and
admiration for the work he has done, both in his professional field and
also for highlighing atheism and letting people know that it is okay not
to believe.

There's also no filming allowed inside, other than the official crew
recording. So if anyone does film and upload to YouTube, then hopefully
that person or persons will be dealt with appropriately.

To finish up, I was a long-time RD forum member. Years in fact. I joined
when the place was barely 12 months old. I know lots of people there
and was a big part of the community. I also know lots of the former Mod
team, some personally. So don't be thinking that I don't know all the
issues here or am unaware of this and that because that would be a bad
assumption.

I expect everyone to behave properly and with respect at the Convention.
Everyone has paid good money to attend and no one will want what may
may well be their one and only chance to hear this amazing scientific
mind speak interupted by peevish and disgruntled former forumites. I
would like to think that we are better than that.

I only hope I am proved right. So many have invested so much in this
convention - I would hate to see it ruined by a few who can't separate
the issues and who aren't mature enough to handle their grievances any
better than by way of public nuisance.

I want to maintain my excitement and anticipation of the GAC. I hate that I'm even having to worry about it potentially being spoiled by some.

I don't object to RD's right to do what he wanted with his forum. I am a little disappointed that he did not consider informing us fully of his intentions, giving us an opportunity to move the community [minus his name, and under a new banner ] to a different venue. Instead, it is clear that he gave little or no weight to the opinions or wishes of that community.

I do not intend to make a public scene that will provoke any further damage to the atheist cause that has already occurred by this unfortunate incident. But neither will I remain silent if asked a question on the matter.

If atheism is going to be successful, we must learn to have more cohesion and purpose as a group, and the upcoming conference [I hope] will provide some opportunity to do so.

Nevertheless, true friends and colleagues must be able to disagree and be able to put different points of view.

Rather than just re-hashing old wounds at the conf, perhaps the atheist body should establish protocols or rules of behavior when we promote our views via the various media, including the internet.

In other words, although well-known atheists are providing their high profile which attracts members, such communities would have little value if it was just a blog by one person. The membership is just as important.

We cats had better learn the herd instinct, or we will cease to be an effective force.

RDF.net Forum was an effective tool at spreading our messages. I am not saying that we should lose our indivduality, but rather, we use a little more care and consideration when making decisions that affect our colleagues.

Atheist and rational thinkers have little enough impact on public policy as it is, we do not need to make it worse by putting our individual interests above those of our community.
Thesits may be bound by delusion, but at least they can show a little cohesion. Can cohesion and dissesnt co-exist? I am not sure, but we had better find out, and to do this, we need agreements and protocols to avoid disasters of this type. So we do need to talk, and talk frankly about our strengths and weaknesses as a community, and put in place agreements that will minimize the negative effects of self-interest and making decisions in isolation without true consultation and compromise.
So maybe a little fighting may clear the air, and lead to something more positive and sustainable.
As others have said, the RDF affair has only touched a minority of the membership. Why should the others care? Simply this, it could happen to any of our communities, at any time. I do think that the thing has to be talked out, agreements made, and protocols established.

[BlackCat]

It wasn't Richard Dawkins per se. I think it was the comments and posters taking over threads and being downright insulting, using dreadful language and being overbearing to those who did not agree. They also posted reams of material to back their arguements at times, so much so that it was near to impossible to keep the ghist if you were not there every day or so.

The Science and Politics Forum was the culprit site I would think. If you happened to post anything remotely questioning AGW aka Climate Change, all the hounds of hell were unleashed upon you. I hadn't been posting regularly but when I did I was so disppapointed that it seemed to have been taken over by so many undeniable overwrought people.

So I stopped posting anything about 4 weeks ago and haven't been back. I posted a comment that I was unhappy with the way things had gone and sent a moderator a PM stating my reasons for not wanting to post there any longer.

Being called stupid and ill informed and lacking any clarifity, etc, ad infinitum, is not my idea of a great way to spend time. So, that was that, and I am not surprised this has happened. It seems to be either post up materials from the web with everything you state or nothing.

As I am time poor, I was not going to start trawling the web for pieces of information to add with my comments. Some people posting on that site would have to have spent their waking hours or sleeping hours doing nothing else. Amazing!

This was my experience. I am still a fan of the Dawk and always will be. I have his books and DVDs. The people posting on the site with maicious intent really brought this about. :mad:

The site was so incredibly huge it must have been a tremendous task to moderate. The mods were great, some of them from Oz. But you know they did post many comments in the threads of their own. I don't see that as a positive for mods because they are the arbittrators.

This is my experience and only my opinion. It is is a shame.

[BlackCat]

I have just had a look at The Dawkins site and quite honestly on reading the Announcements I haven't got a problem with anything that they are doing. The site will continue.

I noticed one of the Moderators services are no longer required! He was a pretty good mod in my opinion but there you go. He did have a lot to say so I suppose he may have attracted more nutters than he deserved. :eek:

I wonder if they will be able to curb the language on the new site though. It will be interesting.

[Praxis]

I noticed one of the Moderators services are no longer required! He was a pretty good mod in my opinion but there you go.
One? The whole bally lot of them were given their marching orders!

They were, with one exception I shall not name, a fantastic and hard working team, who put up with an enormous amount. They all shared the goal of promoting the RD Foundation, its goals and aims, and put in tremendous effort into running that enormous place.

In short, the way it was handled was terrible. There are real people at the end of those keyboards, and they were treated shabbily by Josh Timonen and Andrew Chalkley. I hope one day they receive an apology for how the whole debacle was handled.

And no, this doesn't reflect on the esteem and respect in which RD himself is held by the majority of people. They are separate issues and most people now seem to understand that, however I find I am a little nervous that perhaps not everyone has maturely come to to grips with what occurred.

[Durro]

I'm going to see Richard Dawkins speak this Thursday in Brisbane as part of the Book Writers' festival where he's speaking to a sold out audience of 2500 people. I hope that he's going to take questions, because I have a burning one to ask...

"In the Greatest Show on Earth, where you presented evidence for Evolution, why didn't you include Endogenous Retoviral damage that is common to species with a shared ancestor ? Sure ERV's are a dramatic and definite proof of Evolution from common ancestors and I'm surprised that it wasn't covered in your otherwise comprehensive and excellent book".

Seriously. That's my question. I wouldn't raise the issue of the now defunct forum, for as far as I'm concerned, it's history and Richard has made his feelings on the subject known. Time to move on to more interesting things.

Thanks for the link to Rational Skepticism Ms Praxis - they made me a Moderator after I joined !

Durro

[NateHevens]

Not that I was (a)(e)ffected(which is it?) directly (I barely if ever posted, mostly only lurked on that forum, but I learned a hell of a lot and some of the posts that have been deleted were dear to me... in hindsight, I should have saved them, but I never did :(), but there's some information missing on this thread.

I recommend you all take a day or two to read through the following thread at Rational Skepticism.org:

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=454

Like I said... a day or two... or more. There are a lot links and a ton of information, and as you read a brand new story will emerge. Essentially one of quote-mining, lying, and just plain, downright asshattery.

Peter Harrison has not one, but three blogs on the whole thing, and they are the best to get started with:

http://realityismyreligion.wordpress.com/2010/02/23/locked-entry-will-open-soon/
http://realityismyreligion.wordpress.com/2010/02/25/update-on-dawkins-forum-closure/
http://realityismyreligion.wordpress.com/2010/02/26/my-reaction-to-the-overreaction/

I tend to agree with his second blog. I think Josh and Andrew were given certain orders, royally screwed up, and then, to cover their asses, started pulling the crap that ultimately led to the closing of the forums, including lying to their boss (Richard).

I think the most obvious evidence is this:

Apparently, after shutting down the forums, someone deleted a bunch of members (including volunteers mods and admins) and something like 40,000 posts. They also then entirely erased the thread I'll link to below before Dawkins's outrage post. To cap it all off, they then deleted the administrator logs to erase their tracks.

I hope Dawkins was duped. And I hope he just doesn't realize it, yet. And I'm looking forward to if (when?) he finds out.

Also, here's the thread that ultimately got RDF shut down:
http://thinking-aloud.co.uk/temp/rdf.html

Let's have a treasure hunt with that thread. Anyone who can find any one of the things Dawkins talks about in his Outrage post (http://forum.richarddawkins.net/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=110356) gets 1000 brownie points.

[Praxis]

Nate, most any of us know all of this, so it's a little "after the horse has bolted" ;) Word on teh interwebz moves very fast indeed. Peter Harrison's blog had over 10,000 hits in the first 36 hours!

Durro, I know. And I actually appreciate you dropping in here again. I didn't think we'd see you again. Actually, I need to speak to you about RatSkep and mod stuff okay? I'll email you.

But you know you won't be able to get away from me in a few weeks' time :D

Let us know how you go with your question to RD.

[NateHevens]

Nate, most any of us know all of this, so it's a little "after the horse has bolted" ;) Word on teh interwebz moves very fast indeed. Peter Harrison's blog had over 10,000 hits in the first 36 hours!

Durro, I know. And I actually appreciate you dropping in here again. I didn't think we'd see you again. Actually, I need to speak to you about RatSkep and mod stuff okay? I'll email you.

But you know you won't be able to get away from me in a few weeks' time :D

Let us know how you go with your question to RD.

Praxis, if you're the same Praxis as on Atheist Nexus who responded to my very long comments on the Richard Dawkins group, then I know you know (I'm Nathan Hevenstone)...

I just wanted to get the relevant info on this thread if it was needed. It can be ignored if everyone already knows... :o

[Praxis]

No, she's my sister. Really annoying that she uses the same internet handle as me ;)

**MOD NOTE:**
I'm going to merge this thread with the sticky thread running about the whole event.

I think it's best the discussion is kept in one place.

[NateHevens]

No, she's my sister. Really annoying that she uses the same internet handle as me ;)

:p

n/t

[anthonzi]

T
I joined - it gives me a place where I know I can connect with others I know/used to know from RDF, without having to go Rationalia, which I really don't like, despite being extremely fond of many people there.

Rationalia is my kind of place ;)


. The lost posts mean that posters weren't keeping what they considered their valuable posts on their hard drives. Silly - hard lesson to learn. RDF supplied a free archive for thousands of posts - it should never have been seen as the only record.

WTF? :confused: This kind of logic is deplorable.


The hysterical reaction of some forum members was the tediously predictable response of rather shallow people who were under the mistaken impression that Professor Dawkins owed them something.


He owes them the respect that is owed to any other human being. When people come to depend on a resource (over 3 years time, or has someone been judging the closure rather selectively?), you can't take it away from them at a moments notice and expect no one to get hurt. They deserved to be informed honestly early on so that they could have time to adapt and reconvene elsewhere.

I posted this on my Atheist Nexus blog just before (I very rarely blog) and I thought I'd post it here as well. It covers my thoughts about potential problems on the Sunday
Darwinsbulldog has already addressed your blog post eloquently. All I will add is that what you said was gravely insensitive, and sounds eerily similar to what the religious often say of apostates.

[Veronique]

Ah well. It is always dangerous to deify ordinary people even if they are well known scientists.

So RD has feet of clay. Well!! Who would have thought it!!:rolleyes:

As I said above, I hope no one tries to muck up the Convention for the couple of thousand of other people who bought their tickets very early and are very excited at the prospect of Down Under hosting it's first international atheist convention.

Someone further up this thread and on other threads on other web sites and newspaper comment pages expressed the opinion that people invest so much of their time and effort (and egos and hubris, it must be said) into something like RD dot net and fail to recognise that it is a web site. It is not real life.

Keep your research and copy your posts to your hard drive - that's just common sense so I have little sympathy for those who didn't.

The figures being touted around as the number of lost, deleted posts are set to climb. Some say 30,000, some say 40,000 posts. Who knows? Some say no one can PM another member. Maybe it's only the mods although that seems counter productive. I have sent a PM to someone I have known for years on RD dot net and asked him to PM a reply. I will await that outcome.

What I can say is that I suspect a large number of those posts were ephemeral and of no import bar acknowledgement of each other's presence on the fora.

One person talked on 13,000 odd posts. Another of 16,000 odd posts. The site is 3½ years old. I don't know what else that person did for a life in the real world with real relationships.

That's a worry for me as an older person looking at a younger generation apparently living in its head with its major intellectual and social outlet on a web site.

Social scientists are looking at this growing phenomenon with increasing awareness as well. I am not sure what it augurs.

Of the people with things of note to say, I prefer the Brian Cox's of the scientific world, the Dawkins's, the Dennetts and Peter Atkins; the Jerry Coynes and teachers like PZ Myers. Give me Lawrence Krauss - wonderful bloke. Caroline Porco - marvellous! These people live in a very real world and interact with their fellow man.

That's why I enjoy the TED talks and other fora where so many of them are asked to present papers. But to live on a web site??? I am not sure how healthy that actually is. None of those mentioned do that except as a by-line.

And the distress displayed at the lock down of RD's forum pages and the accusations and vitriol directed at both RD and Josh Timonen for their apparently heavy handed and insensitive approach in doing what was done, leaves some questions unanswered to me. I understand that computer people are often awkward social and PR people and maybe that is part of it - I just don't know. May be RD is not internet community savvy - may be he is a controller although there has been a lot of discussion leeway on his site. He didn't comment much - someone, I think mentioned 430 odd posts of his since he joined on 28 September 2006.

I have read all the mods' comments and blogs. It seems to me that there is something missing in all this - what was the background to such a momentous set of actions? What is it that I don't know?

I joined that site on 7 December 2006. I have a long memory and a sense of appropriate behaviour (that I sometimes transgressed myself). Others were and have been a thousand times worse than I. The personal abuse and mealy-mouthed postings on both the front pages and the forum pages are evident for any to see on any visit.

I have been castigated for not informing myself as to the reasons for the lock down. I might just as well return that charge with one of my own.

Maintain a semblance of proper public behaviour; think about the motives that people exhibit when they have a badge of some sort. Take all things in proportion with their actual importance in the larger scheme of things.

Or as Polonius said:

Give thy thoughts no tongue,
Nor any unproportion'd thought his act.
Be thou familiar, but by no means vulgar;
The friends thou hast, and their adoption tried,
Grapple them to thy soul with hoops of steel;
But do not dull thy palm with entertainment
Of each new-hatch'd, unfledg'd comrade. Beware
Of entrance to a quarrel, but, being in,
Bear 't that th' opposed may beware of thee.
Give every man thine ear, but few thy voice;
Take each man's censure, but reserve thy judgment.

Well, that's the appropriate part of what he said;)

All my best for a great time and I hope Josh will produce the quality of DVDs that we all know he is capable of making.
V

[Sciwoman]

[/URL]Veronique, have you read this yet: [url]http://realityismyreligion.wordpress.com/2010/02/23/locked-entry-will-open-soon/? (http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/forums/member.php?u=884) I was on the forum when the events occurred and Peter Harrison's blog is the best account of the event.

There is something else you should know. That on the front page now, even posts with the most innocent mention of the forum are being deleted. No announcement of the change has been made to the front page posters, although word has spread as a very few posted both in the forum (which used to get around 3,000 posts a day) and on the front page (which gets around 300). Until now the front page has been largely unmoderated except for the removal of spam and trolls. Posts never used to be deleted, only moved. Now deletions are the norm. People are starting to leave the front page - some of whom originally sided with the site and tech admins. Comments have now been disabled on the front page. Too many people asking about the forum I suspect judging from influx of front page posters at rationalskeptic.org who say they've asked questions about it.

[Veronique]

Sciwoman - thank you for your post. I have just accessed RD dot net and RD has written an apology. The latest comments stream is inaccessible.

I will return to RD dot net and read more and find out more. RD apologises for insensitivity and more will be forthcoming, I am sure of that.

It has not been a pleasant time but it has been mishandled on many fronts, not just those emanating from Josh and RD.

I am old enough to know that calming down and some time are reparative measures we could all make use of.

Talk soon and thank you for your post.

Cheers
V - BTW yes I read Peter Harrision's blog the day all this happened.
Edit - Commenting on the front is not disabled. The latest comments page of 100 comments is temporarily disabled, that is all.

[Praxis]

Rationalia is my kind of place ;)
Yes, I thought you might and that's great. Just don't making any dumb assumption as to why I don't like it there okay? ;)


Darwinsbulldog has already addressed your blog post eloquently. All I will add is that what you said was gravely insensitive, and sounds eerily similar to what the religious often say of apostates.
You can bite me, quite frankly. I'm going to go so far as to say you're blowing it right out your arse and it isn't making one bit of sense, just a noxious smell.

Rob (DB) is a friend of mine. Nothing I said was "gravely insenstive". Where? Expressing concern that there may be some people out there who might disrupt a day that so many have looked forward to for so long because they're upset that their forum got taken down? Get a grip, FFS.

Obviously you're not one of those who are mature enough to separate the two (RD speaking on the Sunday of the convention and the forum takedown), thus my concerns would appear to be justified as I'm sure you're not the only one who thinks the way you do.

I posted a clear and concise account of my thoughts in relation to the whole thing, expressing my concern about potential disruptions.

If that's gravely insensitive, then it's high time you grew another few layers of skin.

[Sciwoman]

Yes, I've read the apology. I would have liked some assurance that there would be some effort to restore deleted threads, users and posts. But you can't have everything. ;) I accept the apology but, I doubt I'll post on the new site. I prefer the less smooth edges of a forum where you can post your views on the latest news story one moment and relax with a word game or chit chat about your day the next.

[BlackCat]

One? The whole bally lot of them were given their marching orders!

They were, with one exception I shall not name, a fantastic and hard working team, who put up with an enormous amount. They all shared the goal of promoting the RD Foundation, its goals and aims, and put in tremendous effort into running that enormous place.

In short, the way it was handled was terrible. There are real people at the end of those keyboards, and they were treated shabbily by Josh Timonen and Andrew Chalkley. I hope one day they receive an apology for how the whole debacle was handled.

And no, this doesn't reflect on the esteem and respect in which RD himself is held by the majority of people. They are separate issues and most people now seem to understand that, however I find I am a little nervous that perhaps not everyone has maturely come to to grips with what occurred.

Well I only had a quick look yesterday and noticed one moderator comment, sorry but I feel as you do if they were all told they were not wanted.

I wasn't trying to single out one mod if that's what it appeared to be. The only point I was making was that I didn't have a problem with the site being revamped. :( Geez!