I recently complained about what I considered to be the inappropriate
censorship of my submissions and I suggested that Binga resign from the
self-appointed role as moderator. I suggested that Binga wasn't necessarily
qualified to evaluate every submission with regards to what was fact and what
was opinion. A scientist's opinions are better than most people's facts.
What were Binga's qualifications to judge the difference? As a
Professional Engineer, my opinions hold up in a Court of Law as an expert
witness; yet don't qualify for distribution to the forum(!).
In response, I was informed that I was harrassing Binga and would be reported
to AOL for a violation of their by-laws, whatever they are. I was also
evicted from the forum for being disrespectful of the moderator. Not wishing
to be known as an harrasser, I left peacefully.
I welcome an opportunity to share facts and opinions with others with an
intense interest in this subject matter without the benefit of ill-informed
censorship.
I would suggest that if anyone wants to express an opinion that they qualify
it with some statement of their qualifications so those of us reading all
this stuff can judge for ourselves the validity of the data being presented.
If opinion were banned from public discussion, they would have to shutdown
radio, television, and the newspapers. Things would be sort of like the USSR
during the Stalin era. Thanks again for your breath of fresh air on the Net!
ekarels