Moderators: kiore, Blip, The_Metatron
joshtimonen wrote:CJ,
I can see the RD forum events are still a sore spot. I'm not expecting to be able to fix that, but these recent allegations are serious enough that I felt I should be a bit more visible. Since a lot of people have a dislike for me from that event, I can see that they're jumping to the conclusion that I'm guilty of these ridiculous accusations. In hindsight, I wish I could have stepped aside from the forum situation completely, and let someone else deal with it. I had way too much on my plate then. I'm not trying to come on here and make everyone like me, because I know that won't happen. It's just that I can not allow the Richard Dawkins Foundation or any association I had with it defame my name any longer.
Josh
stijndeloose wrote: A wise decision that anyone can make: if you feel tempted to attack a RatSkep member, take a break.
Gallstones wrote:joshtimonen wrote:CJ,
I can see the RD forum events are still a sore spot. I'm not expecting to be able to fix that, but these recent allegations are serious enough that I felt I should be a bit more visible. Since a lot of people have a dislike for me from that event, I can see that they're jumping to the conclusion that I'm guilty of these ridiculous accusations. In hindsight, I wish I could have stepped aside from the forum situation completely, and let someone else deal with it. I had way too much on my plate then. I'm not trying to come on here and make everyone like me, because I know that won't happen. It's just that I can not allow the Richard Dawkins Foundation or any association I had with it defame my name any longer.
Josh
Oh fucking please, we practically begged you to let us do just this.
joshtimonen wrote:I wish I could explain this all in more detail, but I need to go over my detailed public response with my lawyers first. It will also be important for me to provide all of the evidence, so that it isn't my word vs. theirs. I look forward to having my day in court.
I can't really comment on motivation right now, but there were serious reasons I discontinued my professional relationship with RDF this past May.
Josh
joshtimonen wrote:I wish I could explain this all in more detail, but I need to go over my detailed public response with my lawyers first. It will also be important for me to provide all of the evidence, so that it isn't my word vs. theirs. I look forward to having my day in court.
I can't really comment on motivation right now, but there were serious reasons I discontinued my professional relationship with RDF this past May.
Josh
CJ wrote:However if you are innocent then what possible motivation does Richard or the foundation have of making the accusation? However this pans out you, Richard or a third party in the foundation is going to come out of this looking pretty bad.
mcgruff wrote:CJ wrote:However if you are innocent then what possible motivation does Richard or the foundation have of making the accusation? However this pans out you, Richard or a third party in the foundation is going to come out of this looking pretty bad.
There are all kinds of reasons why. A mistake has been made. Someone is acting maliciously. Maybe someone else stole the money and is deflecting blame. Maybe just a gigantic cock-up that got out of control and nobody fully understands. I've seen them all in my own time as a charity trustee. The one thing I learned from that experience is that although one assumes that people of talent, intelligence and principle gravitate to positions of power it really isn't the case.
It really isn't.
I'm not supporting anyone here but I do believe we have to put aside the resentment felt at the old forum's demise and concentrate on facts and evidence and nothing else, without prejudice. Basically that means waiting for the court case. Whereof one does not know...
joshtimonen wrote:Globe,
I signed up on several forums because people are saying horrible things about Maureen and me, and I wanted to let everyone know that my response will be forthcoming. It's hard to sit back and watch people take potshots at you. Their lawsuit is so full of lies. But I can see that if someone just read that article about it, they would take it as if it was gospel truth. Have you ever sat back and watched tons of people discuss lies about you? It's horrible.
Josh
joshtimonen wrote:I think the larger issue really is the idea of forum post ownership. I understand that people post thousands of posts on other people's websites, and then feel a certain sense of ownership to that content. But the ownership still sits with whoever truly owns and pays for that website. RichardDawkins.net is Richard's website (and RDF's), and if they want to remove content, then it's completely within their right to do so.
mcgruff wrote:CJ wrote:However if you are innocent then what possible motivation does Richard or the foundation have of making the accusation? However this pans out you, Richard or a third party in the foundation is going to come out of this looking pretty bad.
There are all kinds of reasons why. A mistake has been made. Someone is acting maliciously. Maybe someone else stole the money and is deflecting blame. Maybe just a gigantic cock-up that got out of control and nobody fully understands. I've seen them all in my own time as a charity trustee. The one thing I learned from that experience is that although one assumes that people of talent, intelligence and principle gravitate to positions of power it really isn't the case.
It really isn't.
I'm not supporting anyone here but I do believe we have to put aside the resentment felt at the old forum's demise and concentrate on facts and evidence and nothing else, without prejudice. Basically that means waiting for the court case. Whereof one does not know...
joshtimonen wrote:Have you ever sat back and watched tons of people discuss lies about you? It's horrible.
Josh
z8000783 wrote:joshtimonen wrote:I think the larger issue really is the idea of forum post ownership. I understand that people post thousands of posts on other people's websites, and then feel a certain sense of ownership to that content. But the ownership still sits with whoever truly owns and pays for that website. RichardDawkins.net is Richard's website (and RDF's), and if they want to remove content, then it's completely within their right to do so.
So the reason the posts were removed was because you had the right to do so?
John
joshtimonen wrote:Have you ever sat back and watched tons of people discuss lies about you?
It's horrible.
Return to News, Politics & Current Affairs
Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest