Hi, T.J. and Mike. Another community blog I’m on, Daily Kos, does make use of time-outs for egregious behavior. They range from a week to a few months. Before that, or at times instead of that, is being forbidden from uprating comments and diaries (posts by users). Since your blog doesn’t have this feature, Mike, time-outs might or might not work less well. Personally, I think they’d end up working pretty well, since DK has been using them for a few years. Everybody knows the next steps are the Ban Hammer and getting a skull and crossbones (aka “bojo”, short for “bony mojo”) on your account profile. This means the user is banned, which in most cases is permanent. In one or two cases, the bojo has been lifted and the account reinstated after several years – five or so in both cases.

It’s the community aspect that keeps many regulars coming back to DK. For example, I’ve been there almost a dozen years now (and have never gotten an NR [no rating], a time-out, or banned). It’s absolutely one of the things that keeps me coming back here, even though I’m a never-in; there’s great value in your blog for us, too, and the community here is one of the things I value most.

I’ve participated in and managed online communities since the mid-80s. They are no longer so hard to find, but a true community versus an interest group makes a big difference. There are so many interest groups out there where the leadership/management and some of the members are fooled into thinking they’re communities. A true community takes more than just common interests, and the way they form isn’t something I really understand or can explain, word clearing or not. You have one here, and people know it. If you do decide on time-outs, they’ll be back and most likely, better behaved.

Funny, but “puerile” is the third word I think of when I think of Hubbard. The first two are “bullshit” and “genocidal”.

Compared to the ancient Greeks, Hubbard was puerile, from the Latin for “like a (boy) child” (and I didn’t need to look that up in a dictionary). I’d rather be reading a good bit of Stoicism than Hilarious-tory of Man. It’s deeper and makes more sense.

Five Ways I’m Better Than Hubbard:

1) I got a degree…
2) …in a subject where he didn’t pass his first course
3) I passed all of my calculus courses
4) I won more awards in my military career than he did, in the same amount of time, as an enlisted rather than an officer (5 compared to 4)
5) I don’t have gay sex to perform “magick”. I just do it.

Research is not just reading. I’ve read the bible, I can quote various passages restate some of the myths in it using different words (including some I made up) , and claim I created a whole new thing and it totally works. But that does not mean I researched the bible.

He claimed he had done research on his ideas. Where is the research? Show us the research: the methodology, the data, the analysis, the test subjects and the experiments used to verify each and everyone of his ideas. I suspect you cannot do that.

And the implications of my quite sarcastic comment are entirely true. I am not a parrot. Making up results for things you created is not researching them.

Harpoona Frittata, your comment makes a lot of sense.

I do feel for Mike R., having to read many long drawn-out comments that he’d rather not, in order to approve them to the blog, but for the rest of us, it’s easy to skip over those posts we don’t care to read. I agree that even in comments we don’t agree with, we can find value and understanding.

I am totally against censoring free speech on a public blog, and don’t think it’s fair to ban posters we don’t agree with, or restrict them because we don’t like what they say. A “time out” sounds very childish and I doubt many posters would stand for being treated that way, and would likely go elsewhere, which is probably the result that people imposing such measures would be hoping to achieve.

My advice for anyone frustrated by others comments: be tolerant, learn to hone your debating skills, be open to other’s views. Of course, I wouldn’t be tolerant of someone posting rude, offensive comments repeatedly, hate speech, targeting someone with repeated insults, excessive profanity, derogatory names based on someone’s gender, etc. That’s not acceptable. But I think most of us can tell the difference between someone feeling passionately about their views and showing that in their comments, which would seem to be in the realm of permissive commenting, and someone who is being unduly offensive, harassing, etc., which would need to be addressed.

This actually is a very cool blog because of the commenters, their diverse views and the interesting conversations, and the fact that Mike Rinder is open to allowing people to express their views, he seems to be a more hands-off, minimal intrusion kind of blog owner, and doesn’t “micro-manage” things, but he does step in when needed. 5 stars out of 5. Certificate arrives in the mail in 7 to 10 days. << Joke, for those who don't recognize humor (or just don't think I'm funny).

Personal note: I have learned a lot by reading and participating here in the last 2 years or so, (not just about Scientology) and hope this blog continues on in this manner, allowing a lot of leeway in comments ad attracting a diverse audience.

califa007, L Con didn’t plagiarize everything. Trains on Venus, freezing ghosts with glycol, WW2 era aircraft being used as intergalactic space ships, driving cars in dense fog using his own native radar. He made up some really big woppers for his “tek”.

Nickname asked, “Just out of idle curiosity about your logic, how can someone not do research and at the same time be falsely accused of plagiarizing earlier works? ”

Because in the context asked, it is about ORIGINAL research. NOT, looking up OTHER people’s PRIOR research.

Studying PRIOR research done by another is NOT conducting original research.

The amount of theta, prana, energy or light endowed to a person is determined by ones receptivity to the Infinite Source that gives life to all.

The infinite supply is regulated by our knowledge of it.

The increase of knowledge and power evolves into infinity by spiritual practice of meditation.

It’s all here. Our job is to live an ethical life and practice the procedures of the Great Sages.

The supply is constantly increasing because the source is Infinity.

I don’t believe reading other people’s research papers is tantamount to doing your own research although research papers are written to be read particularly by people who conduct their own research.

In the case of Dianetics we see Hubbard advancing “theories” presumably based on observations, for how else do you arrive at a theory? Right? You observe results. Hubbard claims to have done such and such a thing and got such and such results. Dianetics is ostensibly an account of his findings. Only problem is, those research findings CAN’T BE DUPLICATED!

That’s a problem. To those who don’t know any better it sorta looks like he made it all up which means he would be a BALD-FACED LIAR! See what I mean?

Those who look askance on such things might succumb to the temptation of sarcasm. Forgive them I say although there’s evidence that is NOT what Ron intended.

Just out of idle curiosity about your logic, how can someone not do research and at the same time be falsely accused of plagiarizing earlier works? How can someone be accused of not reading earlier work, and at the same time be accused of plagiarizing it? You would seem to offer incontrovertible proof of OT abilities, of knowing without reading, or of reading a closed book.

Even a cursory look at Dianetics shows that he researched and developed entirely new theories and methods. There is also more than ample documentation of research, and recorded evidence of Hubbard conducting auditing sessions, and written records of his personal case supervision.

The implications of your sarcastic comment are entirely false. I suspect you are merely repeating false and malicious “talking points” you picked up elsewhere.

And every publisher from Princeton plagiarizes the Egyptians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhind_Mathematical_Papyrus). All you are doing with your post is parroting an unfounded and malicious line you read somewhere.

Hubbard acknowledged earlier works, explicitly and implicitly. He dedicated books to some of them. Had he been applying for a patent, he would have been granted it easily on the basis of significant improvements and new configurations of use.

Maslow’s constructions are puerile in comparison to Hubbard’s contributions. Might as well say that “be yourself” is a major philosophical contribution to all mankind, and there, now you know all the answers and can proceed to lead a happy life.