Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

This board is open for all subject matters. Post information and discussion materials about open-debate and censorship on other boards (including this one) here. Memory Hole 2 is a RODOH subforum for alternate perspectives.
Post Reply
User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 26822
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by Nessie » Sun Apr 17, 2016 5:48 pm

It is not defaming you by pointing out you minimal contribution to the Holocaust debate. Just a search of your posts shows you hardly ever contribute and so far have not contributed at all to the new sub forum. As for calling you a troll, you called me one, so grow up and learnt to take it when you dish out.

I have had to second guess what been-there counts as an ad hom, what needs evidencing and what does not and what he considers sufficient evidence. It is clear from my attempts that anything which refers to his argument in a negative way is to be deleted as an ad hom, which is akin to what Hannover does. Is that what you want here?

Been-there wants the lack of evidence in various sources for Chelmno as a transit camp presented. But he then strangely shouts "REFERENCING THE OPINION OF ENCYCLOPEDIAS, ETC., IS NOT PROVIDING VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE!!". Actually yes referencing encyclopaedias is verifiable evidence when I am evidencing what the encyclopaedia entry does not say. The only way to do that is to link to the source and people can read them and see for themselves no evidence for it being a transit camp. No witnesses, no documents, no reference at all. Yet he shouts in his editing "CLAIMING A LACK OF EVIDENCE IS NOT SUPPLYING EVIDENCE". In fact showing an absence of something is evidence. If a doctor shows no sign of cancer, that is evidence a person does not have cancer. It is not my fault been-there does not understand that.

He then shouts "STATING YOUR OWN OPINION IS NOT EVIDENCE." No where have I claimed my opinion is evidence. Been-there is moderating using the strawman fallacy.

Next he shouts "CONTRIBUTORS MUST PROVIDE DOCUMENTARY OR ANECDOTAL OR FORENSIC EVIDENCE in support of ALL CONTENTIONS MADE." But I have evidenced with a secondary source that there were transports to Chelmno form Lodz. His demand for "ALL" is contrary to his previous post comment of "So speculative scenarios presented as such, obviously do not require "evidence"." That is because he wants to avoid having to evidence his comment that "very few people actually were deported to Chelmno, and of those who had passed through, none wanted to contradict the official story in the 1960's when it became more widespread".

I could go on, but his failure as a fair, balanced consistent moderator is clear.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
DasPrussian
Posts: 3257
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 5:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by DasPrussian » Sun Apr 17, 2016 9:11 pm

Nessie wrote:It is not defaming you by pointing out you minimal contribution to the Holocaust debate. Just a search of your posts shows you hardly ever contribute and so far have not contributed at all to the new sub forum. As for calling you a troll, you called me one, so grow up and learnt to take it when you dish out.

Hey Traynor, funny how someone else has noticed your pathetic input on this forum. I often wondered what the point of your existence actually is on here. Any ideas ?
All I want for Christmas is a Dukla Prague away kit

User avatar
Duke Umeroffen
Posts: 5783
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 1:11 pm
Contact:

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by Duke Umeroffen » Mon Apr 18, 2016 11:52 am

Holy Moly, I knew no good would come of this.

Whatever possessed you to reply to Been There's thread Nessie, you know he is not (open Rollo the Ganger-style italics, "like other people." close Rollo the Ganger italics,) is he?

He can KISS off as far as I'm concerned.

Poor Mr Smith and Fishcheck, worn down by this guy's barrage of entreatments to be allowed to be left in charge of anything more complicated than a packet of peanuts finally relent.

Mind you its very entertaining,if aimed at Revisionist simpletons, a link to crapbook pages and one reply so far...from the OP, himself.
Viking; North Utsire; South Utsire; Forties; Cromarty; ; Firth; Tyne; Dogger. Fisher; German Bight; Humber; Thames *; Dover;

User avatar
Duke Umeroffen
Posts: 5783
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 1:11 pm
Contact:

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by Duke Umeroffen » Mon Apr 18, 2016 12:01 pm

Bit unfair claiming that Fish doesn't contribute Nessie, he did bring us the hot of the press news that the Bad Arolsen archives were open...

Who else wished Been There all the best with this exciting if somewhat "dumbed down" venture?
Viking; North Utsire; South Utsire; Forties; Cromarty; ; Firth; Tyne; Dogger. Fisher; German Bight; Humber; Thames *; Dover;

User avatar
Charles Traynor
Posts: 2937
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 8:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by Charles Traynor » Mon Apr 18, 2016 2:18 pm

Go away, troll.

:)
Kitty Hart-Moxon (1998): "Believe me, I came into Auschwitz in a much worse condition than I actually left it."

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 26822
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by Nessie » Fri Apr 22, 2016 10:11 am

Now the new sub forum has ground to a halt and it is clear everyone prefers the original, will we have a debate on how it should be moderated and been-there's role.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

Bob
Posts: 3404
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 3:30 pm
Contact:

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by Bob » Sat Apr 23, 2016 10:06 am

The new section is a good idea, but since the goal is to debate on serious level then considering lack of serious exterminationists it does not make much sense to put effort in posting into this section when exterminationists on this board won´t pass simple "rules", so why to bother? I do not bother to feed local trolls anymore and stopped feeding them, so who is left to debate with? Crying, complaints and some abuse from exterminationist trolls was exactly what I expected when I heard about this idea for the first time, and I was right.

Some people would do better if they stop feeding the trolls too, no feeding seems to work on some of them, so it should work on the most active one too, you will save lot of time like me.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 26822
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by Nessie » Sat Apr 23, 2016 11:54 am

Bob the troll's contribution to the debate is to suggest not debating. That is because he has had such a pasting here he has had to run away to preserve his fragile ego :lol:
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 26822
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by Nessie » Thu May 05, 2016 11:33 am

Been-there let Rollo post a claim that the Sonderkommando photo of burning bodies at Birkenau was a train crash in Dresden, Ohio in 1912 without any evidence to back the claim up.

viewtopic.php?f=28&p=76993#p76966

I posted a request for Rollo to evidence the photo is from Dresden Ohio and and been-there has rejected it because "The reported message is off topic. This has nothing to do with Chemno. Please stop obfuscating.."

How is it off topic when it has been accepted as part of the debate on Chelmno and how bodies were disposed of?
How is requesting a photo is verified obfuscating?

In this thread specifically on the photo;

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2510

Werd and Bob have both agreed the photo is not of a train crash in Ohio. Been-there should either let my request for the verification of the photo stand or remove Rollo's unevidenced claim it is of a train crash.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8526
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by been-there » Thu May 05, 2016 12:28 pm

Nessie wrote:Been-there let Rollo post a claim that the Sonderkommando photo of burning bodies at Birkenau was a train crash in Dresden, Ohio in 1912 without any evidence to back the claim up.

viewtopic.php?f=28&p=76993#p76966

I posted a request for Rollo to evidence the photo is from Dresden Ohio and and been-there has rejected it because "The reported message is off topic. This has nothing to do with Chelmno. Please stop obfuscating.."

How is it off topic when it has been accepted as part of the debate on Chelmno and how bodies were disposed of?
How is requesting a photo is verified obfuscating?

In this thread specifically on the photo;

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2510

Werd and Bob have both agreed the photo is not of a train crash in Ohio. Been-there should either let my request for the verification of the photo stand or remove Rollo's unevidenced claim it is of a train crash.
The topic is about mass gassings at Chelmno. As a moderator I am trying to keep debate on topic.
I also rejected a post today with more material on that photo by 'Denying-history' also saying it was off-topic and suggesting that if he wants to post his material start a new thread.
Your post, in contrast to D-H's rejected material added nothing to the debate. It only took the discussion more off-topic.
If you want to join in genuine discussion at the new forum then follow the rules and accept moderstion decisions. There are only four of them.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest