Also I’m not complaining. I don’t care if that guy wants to go for it, I was just making an observation and expressing that I was surprised he’d try. You know, with that search function existing and me being crazy enough to use it.
It’s not, but also I didn’t say you said it would definitely happen. See Cassette’s post.
Can you pay your losing Covid bet before you go please?
3 Likes
I will second this. I have also thought a few posters have been able to habitually cross the line with churchill with zero consequence. Others may disagree but I don’t think he is here in bad faith. That being said it’s obvious he has a certain viewpoint on Covid most of us don’t agree with. That shouldn’t make it open season on him though. Deleting posts or temps for egregious misinformation seems fine but every post he makes is followed up by personal attacks by the same 2-3 posters for months. I think bad faith trolls (RAIDS for example) deserve that but I wouldn’t put churchill in the same category.
4 Likes
-
Churchill hasn’t been permanently banned
-
I used to think the same about Churchill posting in good faith, but Churchill has clearly not been posting in good faith for the past few months. His latest claims about Covid being in Barcelona in March 2019 and France in Fall 2019 was especially bad dishonest trolling bullshit. That wasn’t a ‘different opinion’, that was obvious bad faith nonsense.
Totally agree… that’s also not what was done whatsoever. For example:
That is textbook bad faith stuff.
I don’t see what point 1 has to do with anything. I mostly stopped reading the Covid thread months ago because your tone towards the other posters is miserable. So maybe you are right on #2 but from my perspective most of churchill’s posting was about concern over variants diminishing the effectiveness of the vaccine. Even if he is wrong about that, that seems like a fairly common take I have seen experts fret about.
Anyways I’m not here to defend the substance of his posts really. I’m just saying he hasn’t been a bad faith poster from my perspective. Nor a troll. It’s obvious he believes what he posts.
That isn’t bad faith posting even if he is wrong.
10 Likes
You don’t read the covid thread because of my ‘tone’, and you have an opinion on Churchill’s posting in the covid thread, but you don’t read it.
Well then. I’m left wondering how you have an opinion at all. Churchill hasn’t eaten bans for his point of view. Openly stating that you don’t read the thread, but defending Churchill’s posting in it makes no sense whatsoever and seems more than a little dishonest.
1 Like
I have an opinion about a year of you being the self-hailed site Covid expert and the way you treat anyone who disagrees with anything you say.
Even if you are actually right you come across as a total dick to a lot of posters in that thread. You have made hundreds of personal attacks. What exactly does that accomplish other than to stroke your ego exactly?
Lol at the edit. I specifically said I’m not defending the substance of his posting. Now that is some bad faith if you want an actual example.
10 Likes
You can try to make this about me all you want, I do not care that won’t work. Your defense of Churchill’s posting is dishonest… you haven’t even read it. His latest posting has been exactly the type of posting you say RAIDS does, you just don’t know about it.
If you have a problem with me, you can just tell me or complain about it instead of defending churchill in bad faith.
You’re saying that it’s not dishonest bad faith posting. It obviously is. You can see my example above, it’s got very bad.
I’m not aware of the recent spats tbh because I haven’t read it in a while.
What I’m saying is that I haven’t seen churchill habitually abuse other posters while taking a lot of abuse. I didn’t call you out in my original post either. You showed up on your own to take more shots at him.
If he is posting disinformation or the like it seems like the moderators are on that. Report the post, ignore him and move on.
1 Like
Churchill’s posting style can be abrasive, he no doubt contributes heavily to most of his COVID posts turning into grudge matches. Count me in the wish he stays camp and thr wish everyone would turn the temp down on the COVID thread. If ever a subject called for humility and patience, it is COVID.
6 Likes
I’ve e already asked in the Covid-19 thread for Churchills posts to be left up (The BBC ones) and if members what to dissect & explain them then that’s all the better to the likes of me and we’ll I’m sure some other posters too, whether that’s lurkers or future visitors.
To me this forum thrived when complex information is laid out in a layman’s terms and everything Churchill has posted is from supposid reputable sources since not once that I can remember has any poster called out the actual source and when a poster is maybe miss reading charts and graphs etc then others will be too.
Or do we need a PhD to enter? /s
+1,000
2 Likes
You probably shouldn’t be guessing on church’s behavior in the Covid thread. It has moved beyond that you listed (although you kind of minimized his previous form)
I rarely if ever engaged him in that thread but it has been horrible. When confronted by actual scientists he never backs down or adjusts on things he really doesn’t understand.
His performance in that thread is one of the worst on the site.
I don’t care about him being wrong about stuff, but it’s the way that he not-so-thinly roots for things being worse in the US/scoreboards a global pandemic that has killed millions that is beyond the pale imo.
1 Like
Having patience with covid is understandable. Saying stuff like “covid was in Spain in March 2019” is not reasonable. That might have maybe been ok in early 2020, but at this stage of the game it is ridiculously bad faith.
Fair enough. Ultimately I’m not defending him as much as saying there have been other poorly behaved participants in that thread. It’s been unreadable to me for a long time and it has very little to do with churchill. Admittedly I mostly have skipped or skimmed his posts though even when I was reading it. So maybe that is it.
The problem is that he frequently comments on those sources arguing they say something which they mostly do not. He also tries to turn the pandemic into a UK vs. US thing. Don’t know why he has such a bee in his bonnet about the US. Maybe his great-great-great-great-great-grandfrather was killed in the revolutionary war and his clan has sworn a blood feud.
3 Likes
This thread is supposed to be about moderation, not you turning up a year later and thinking you understand the context of old arguments.
People were freaking out about this while minimising the toll that malaria takes on African lives (because ldo they aren’t American), which is 400,000 every single fucking yesr.
All of this, as well as his recent tripling-down on his incorrect takes. For all the “let’s be humble and patient in the covid thread,” humility and patience begets humility and patience. If you come in with a blistering hot take that it’s as good as confirmed that covid was in France in October of 2019, or in Barcelona in March of 2019, after a string of confident but dead wrong takes, you’ll have worn out everyone else’s patience with your complete lack of humility.
I’m not looking to ban people from being wrong in that thread. Everyone has ignorance and misconception, certainly including me. But there’s a big difference between posting something wrong, getting corrected, and moving on with the new information, and talking down to legitimate experts in the field while being blatantly and obviously wrong, and continuing to do so even once corrected in good faith. Churchill never got into trouble or even caught an appreciable amount of flak from other posters when simply posting articles. It’s when his own commentary not merely misunderstands but deliberately misrepresents the contents that he’s way over the line.
3 Likes