Re: Ken & 's post, and others like it.

[Guest guest]

I say delete them at the source, then maybe they will shut up and get out of the

way and let us profit from those who have something to say that will be a help

to the rest of us. I have CLL and am looking for what will help me at this

difficult time.

[Guest guest]

Agreed.

Arthurs <arthurs@...> wrote:I say delete them at the source, then maybe

they will shut up and get out of the way and let us profit from those who have

something to say that will be a help to the rest of us. I have CLL and am

looking for what will help me at this difficult time.

[Guest guest]

Sounds good to me Leo, I don't have time to waste reading that stuff.

Thanks,

Jan

regehr2001 wrote:

>

> I have just deleted a post which contained a back and forth discussion

> with a confirmed anti- person. I could see no positive value in

> it. Now, here comes another one, a long one at that.

>

> If list members explain how it helps them personally, I will allow it

> to stay. Otherwise I will delete it and others like it as they come

> along. I will not allow ranting naysayers a presence on our list, even

> indirectly through legitimate members' posts.

> Leo

> Moderator

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

The webs sites I directed you to, clearly showed that,

1. The peer review system that this person touted so highly, is

untrustworthy, and

2. It is unrealistic to think that " a well designed study " can readily

be found in peer reviewed journals.

These are fundamental problems. They point a dagger at the heart of

this person's arguments. And you mentioned as well, you were not

impressed with this person's arguments.

So if this person never comes up with an answer to the problems

reported at that site either by your standards or by my standards (let

alone addresses them) how does your conversation back and forth serve

the purpose of this list? So, my qualifications were not met. I asked

other list members for their input on this, and their replies speak

for themselves.

To repeat, I will not tolerate giving sensless rants a place on this

list, even if they are posted by sensible list members. And I invite

more input from the list on this.

Leo

Moderator

------------------------------------------

> >

> > I have just deleted a post which contained a back and forth

> discussion

> > with a confirmed anti- person. I could see no positive value

> in

> > it. Now, here comes another one, a long one at that.

> >

> > If list members explain how it helps them personally, I will allow

> it

> > to stay. Otherwise I will delete it and others like it as they

come

> > along. I will not allow ranting naysayers a presence on our list,

> even

> > indirectly through legitimate members' posts.

> > Leo

> > Moderator

[Guest guest]

Ok, Leo.

-Ken Bagwell

> > >

> > > I have just deleted a post which contained a back and forth

> > discussion

> > > with a confirmed anti- person. I could see no positive

value

> > in

> > > it. Now, here comes another one, a long one at that.

> > >

> > > If list members explain how it helps them personally, I will

allow

> > it

> > > to stay. Otherwise I will delete it and others like it as they

> come

> > > along. I will not allow ranting naysayers a presence on our

list,

> > even

> > > indirectly through legitimate members' posts.

> > > Leo

> > > Moderator