Could you explain the rules (or norms) around here, and specifically your principles of moderating?
I find this thread pretty puzzling.
It seems to me legitimate to raise questions here on CFI forums about Chris Money’s public claims and behavior on his blog, as well as in his books, newspaper opinion pieces, etc.
We seem to be getting told that if we have concerns about Chris’s or behavior on his blog, we should ask about them on his blog, not here. But of course part of the point is that he won’t answer questions on his blog. Where should we ask them. Anywhere but here?
We also seem to be getting told that on the one hand, people like Ophelia, who we think have been treated unfairly, aren’t objective enough—-they have an anti-Chris agenda or something, and that’s somehow not fair. So his alleged victims of his allegedly unfair behavior should not themselves do anything about it. (To me, that smacks of blaming the victim.) But on the other hand, people whose personal oxen were not gored “don’t have a dog in the fight,” and should just let it go.
That’s some catch, that Catch-22.
What are the relevant rules or principles here?
I’m wondering if I detect a note, on the part of some commenters here, of knee-jerk defense of Mooney, who they’re familiar with and respect, and an assumption that some people criticizing him must be disgruntled cranks from his blog who should be discouraged here. (I could be quite wrong, but just in case…)
They may not realize that Ophelia Benson is a professional philosopher, a published author and editor of skeptic/atheist books, and IMHO not someone to be dismissed lightly.
I myself am a cofounder of an unusually successful local atheist group that Paul Kurtz and DJ Grothe notied and liked very much, and wanted to make part of CFI. I played a role in negotiations with them and others to make that happen. (As it happens, it didn’t happen, but there it is.) DJ has since said our organization was partly the inspiration and model for some later changes to CFI’s local efforts.
So just in case anybody was wondering, and is familiar with Chris bu not familiar with us as individuals, we’re not just some disgruntled kids in their parent’s basements with nothing better to do than take cheap and unfair shots at Chris Mooney. We’ve been around and paid some dues.
I, for one, am wondering why we are being shut down.
In particular, I’m wondering about Darron’s sudden about-face, and especially his striking statement that he had “no right to question” Chris’s behavior on his blog. How can that be true on the forum’s of the Center for Inquiry, or about a host of Point of Inquiry?
Several of us had to wonder what we missed that changed Darron’s mind. Was there private email from Chris or the moderator or something? Perhaps a reminder of the rules of discourse here? If so, we’d be interested in what relevant information was conveyed—-it certainly didn’t come out in the comments, and this has all left us puzzled.