|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
31st December 2011, 10:51 PM | #201 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,292
|
I'll preface this by saying none of it has anything to do with my previous employment at the JREF, and that all the information I give is my opinion.
The JREF forum is not a resource. Not really. Consider a comparison between the amount of money Penn Jillette has donated publicly to the JREF (tens of thousands of dollars PER YEAR) to the amount donated by every forum member combined. Unless someone super freaking rich who likes remaining anonymous is hanging around these boards, I doubt these figures even merit comparison. And, even if there is a super freaking rich person hanging around anonymously, I doubt that the reason they give has anything whatever to do with the forum, and more to do with love for the JREF and its goals. If you've attended TAM, then you may have looked around when they ask the series of questions, "Are you a member of the JREF forums?", "Is this your first TAM?". When I looked around, the handraising seemed to indicate that most attendees were at TAM for the first time. Most were not forum members. There's no great reason for the JREF staff to communicate often with the forumites because the forumites are the least likely supporters of the JREF to give meaningful support. So we make brilliant posts that can be Googled, and in return, the JREF lets us hang here under their name. This is fair; this is equal. I do buck under the sentiment I get from the e-mails and the PM. But the fact of the matter is - even if I WAS donating, it would be so little as to be superfluous. DJ said, earlier in the thread (unless I am mistaken, I didn't go look at it again), that the executive salaries are paid by a single donor. That is hundreds of thousands of dollars from ONE person. Is it any wonder, really, that we did not get a special PM? Face it - we don't merit one. The reason the forum table is at TAM isn't because it's so important it needs representation. It is because very few attendees are aware of its existence. What would ultimately make more sense is to separate the JREF from the forum and have someone else run it. It could still fly under the JREF name, but not be associated to any greater extent. And actually, if you look at it, isn't that pretty much already the way it is? What I do not appreciate, on the other hand, is DJ's use of the terms 'professional' and 'successful' to describe current employees in such a way as to imply that prior ones were NOT professional or successful. Even before I started working with the JREF, heading the forum and keeping his hands in its activities was part of Jeff's job description. Since the entirety of Bart's employment that I'm aware of personally falls under a time when I was employed by the JREF, I'll not comment on it. From my work with other non-profits (I was a security guard, docent, and membership coordinator for an art museum, as well as a couple of other places in lesser roles), I would've expected the call for donations from the JREF to be more clearly itemized. For instance, alright, you have provided materials to schools regarding critical thinking. What schools? How many? What materials? How are they being used? ARE they being used? Did you just mail them over and stand back and hope it would work out, or are you working with districts to ensure these programs are installed, and to measure their success? Maybe this information is in the newsletter. I wouldn't know. I don't subscribe to it. But therein lies the problem - I shouldn't have to reach out for information on these things. It should be at my fingertips, because THAT is the mark of a 'successful' fundraiser - being able to tell, at a glance, what you have done, what you will do, what you hope to do, and your timeframe for doing it. The entirety of the future plans for the JREF, in the call for donations (which you can see here: http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/...37-static/1471 ) is one sentence, which reads:
Quote:
Again, this is my opinion as an interested party, and has nothing whatever to do with my employment at the JREF. I do wish, in fact, that we had used the suggestion made by CaptainObvious when I was still there - because I'd much rather post this without anyone being able to tell who I am. But oh well. There's my two cents. With so many people donating theirs, hell of a fundraiser it is. |
31st December 2011, 11:09 PM | #202 |
In the Peanut Gallery
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 54,894
|
I'm sorry I started this thread (although someone else would have) but want to make a couple of comments. Some have suggested that if you don't contribute to the JREF you are a freeloader. Fine, I understand where that comes from, but I am a member of the Australian Skeptics, so I think I've made a contribution to the "cause". And I think others outside the US would feel that contributions to a local skeptical organization would be a better investment.
And, again, I have no problems with the JREF soliciting donations. I just hate nagging. |
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill |
|
31st December 2011, 11:09 PM | #203 |
Muse
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 652
|
|
__________________
Any time it can be proved that one of my studies is wrong, I am more eager than anyone to acknowledge AND CORRECT IT. Jack White Little White Lies....... |
|
31st December 2011, 11:22 PM | #204 |
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 13,389
|
|
31st December 2011, 11:27 PM | #205 |
In the Peanut Gallery
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 54,894
|
|
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill |
|
1st January 2012, 01:32 AM | #206 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 314
|
|
__________________
"Thinking critically is a chore. It does not come naturally or easily. And if the fruits of such efforts are not carefully displayed to young minds, then they will not harvest them. Every school child must be implanted with the wonder of the atom, not the thrall of magic." - Perry DeAngelis |
|
1st January 2012, 06:07 PM | #207 |
Guest
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,290
|
|
1st January 2012, 08:02 PM | #208 |
Chief Solipsistic
Autosycophant Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 13,414
|
Sadly, this kind of response is symptomatic of the non-skeptical "you're either with us or against us" kind of mentality. Either I have to completely condemn the JREF, or completely support them.
I stick by the initial posts I made -- posts which clearly stated that the JREF had every right to use this forum in the way they did:
Quote:
Having said everything there was to say on that point, I saw no point in repeating myself; however, there were other members using this as an excuse to launch an all-out attack on the JREF, complete with completely unfounded (and demonstrably false) accusations, such as Bart's claim that Randi knew nothing about this PM. Funny. I get some people piling on me because I'm "too critical" of the JREF, and I should just shut my mouth. I get others, like you, conversely accusing me of being a "JREF booty smoocher". Meanwhile, for me, it's not about taking sides, being "for" or "against" the JREF. It is about truth. And the truth lies somewhere in the middle between these two extremes: the JREF makes mistakes, and has some policies with which I disagree; but it also does a lot of work that I think is admirable, and deserving of support. There is no contradiction or hypocrisy in this position; in fact, it is a far more consistent and intellectually honest appraisal, than those who've taken more extreme positions, either claiming that it is somehow wrong to criticize the JREF at all, or to suggest that there might be better ways of accomplishing their goals...or those who just use this to engage in a little hate-fest, with little or no regard to the factuality or validity of their accusations. |
__________________
Please check out my business, The Language of Culture |
|
1st January 2012, 11:36 PM | #209 |
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 13,389
|
You guys seriously think this thread is conducive to encouraging administration to require workers to come post here?
This place is filled with the kind of crazy people in the world that the homeless know to steer clear of on the subway. I swear, LMAO. Myself included of course. "It's about the TRUTH man, it's about the TRUTH!" |
1st January 2012, 11:52 PM | #210 |
Chief Solipsistic
Autosycophant Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 13,414
|
Actually, it accomplished having a real dialogue with DJ (both in public, and in private), and expressing my views (I don't know about others); he may not agree with me, but at least we were able to have a rational discussion about it. As opposed (just for example) to condescending mockery, while contributing nothing of any real value to the discussion, in order to assume a feigned superiority over others...
...not to mention that nowhere did I tell them they should "require workers to post here"...actually, my comments were almost entirely about have DJ or Randi take at least a slightly more active role, or else encouraging other staff to get more involved with the forum when they have time. Not to mention several other suggestions that had nothing to do with this claim at all. But don't let a few straw men stop you...it never has before |
__________________
Please check out my business, The Language of Culture |
|
2nd January 2012, 12:46 AM | #211 |
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 13,389
|
Classic
|
2nd January 2012, 12:55 AM | #212 |
In the Peanut Gallery
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 54,894
|
|
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill |
|
2nd January 2012, 04:25 AM | #213 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 28,766
|
I think JREF's tendency to ask for "membership equivalent" donations alienates those with just a few dollars/ pounds whatever to spare.
The home page DONATE button does offer an "other amount" option , with the option to make a regular monthly donation. There may be a minimum amount worth making (to avoid admin costs swallowing most or all of it). It still needs a credit card though. A PayPal option would surely help. I wonder if there's a safe way to "pool" small donations? |
2nd January 2012, 10:14 AM | #214 |
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 13,389
|
You know maybe the forum itself could try to do fundraising for the JREF once a year for people who like you say don't have a lot to donate.
At the same time I think someone else posted that the forum donates a very small percentage of their overall funding. The database is simply used because it would be foolish not to use it. Yes it was a few extra emails delete delete delete. Pms delete delete. I only really got annoyed when people started making demands about how the JREF needs to ask their staff to come to post here. And lionking, again you don't see the hypocrisy in your statement. Is it you or me that needs to get the last word in? If you don't like what I post, put me on ignore. Thanks. |
2nd January 2012, 11:20 AM | #215 |
Student
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 31
|
What I said about Randi, specifically was "I don't believe for a minute that Randi knew about the PM".
Why do I need to 'prove' something I said was a statement of belief and was clearly my opinion? You should apologize for being at least as big of a douchebag as I am. People... keep your eye on the ball. Be skeptical. Don't believe me, for the love of god don't believe people who are master manipulators. Look for the facts and figure it out for yourselves. If you think the JREF is a fantastic organization run with an ethical board and a super duper great guy at the helm, then give them all your money. More power to you. What do I have to gain by saying this about the JREF? I have one thing that some others do not have. A CONSCIENCE. Again, do your own research, I'm outta here. Bart |
2nd January 2012, 11:36 AM | #216 |
Student
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 31
|
Actually, one more thing.
There's no doubt a great deal of JREF damage control going on behind the scenes to disparage me, which I expect. What I want to point out is that I am not the 'disgruntled employee'. I am, in fact, a serious skeptic who is disillusioned which having looked behind the curtain. I worked for the JREF for about 4.5 years. 3.5 of those years I worked entirely as an unpaid volunteer where i worked to improve TAM, worked at TAM, and spent thousands of dollars to fly back and forth to Fort Lauderdale to scan over 12,000 pages of documents in Randi's files into a digital form so that the records of all of the past challenges could be accessible to many rather than sitting in a rusting file drawer. I worked for the JREF because to me, despite the fact that non-profit work pays very little, it was a dream job where I thought I could really help further skepticism. So, if you can parse the fact that I spent years giving to the JREF and helping out for free, never imposing on Randi or trying to snuggle up to celebrities with the 'disgruntled employee' mantra, then fine, but I thought it important that I at least educate those who may not know who I am. I LOVE Randi, and I loved the JREF. I have been a paid member of the JREF since 1998!!! I was one of the people who put up $1,000 for the challenge when Randi brought it up to $250,000.00. I am not a short time employee who is hard done by, I am a life-long skeptic who has given a lot. If you view me as a douchebag who is trying to subvert the JREF, fine. You are entitled to your opinion. If you are interested in my opinion where to put your skeptical money. Give it to local skeptical groups that are doing good work you can see and tangibly quantify. |
2nd January 2012, 11:53 AM | #217 |
Muse
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 555
|
I don't know if anyone else has mentioned this (long thread), but is it possible that this is all a hoax or a joke? I got the PM too, and the first thing that crossed my mind is that this is very much the opposite of what I expect from a skeptic forum.
|
2nd January 2012, 01:37 PM | #218 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
|
2nd January 2012, 02:13 PM | #219 |
Gentleman of leisure
Tagger
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Flying around in the sky
Posts: 28,092
|
The PM came from Randi. This means it came from someone who can control his userid. This means someone from JREF. If someone wanted to send out a PM from Randi and was not connected to JREF they would need to get access to his password. This ignores the content being the same as what is on the site and the fact that no-one from JREF has stated it was a fake.
|
2nd January 2012, 02:46 PM | #220 |
post-pre-born
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 25,183
|
|
2nd January 2012, 04:07 PM | #221 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605
|
|
2nd January 2012, 04:54 PM | #222 |
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 13,389
|
|
2nd January 2012, 04:59 PM | #223 |
post-pre-born
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 25,183
|
|
2nd January 2012, 05:06 PM | #224 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605
|
This is understandable, though folks make bone-headed posts throughout the forum (both in public, and in private) on a regular basis. The dust settles, folks cool off and give things a second thought, and some even realize that they said things they wish they hadn't. Par.
But, corporate smarm conceived of and endorsed by corporate smarmites, foisted upon unsuspecting skeptics in the name of the skeptical movement, here in the hallowed halls of skeptificity? Well, that just gets my goat, dagnabbit! |
2nd January 2012, 05:17 PM | #225 |
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 13,389
|
It's funny because if people had had a sense of humor about it, I think it would have come across very differently.
Happy New Year to your goat btw. changed my avatar for a bit until the "she's a chick" sinks in. |
2nd January 2012, 05:31 PM | #226 |
Muse
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 555
|
|
2nd January 2012, 06:10 PM | #227 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 2,605
|
|
2nd January 2012, 11:47 PM | #228 |
post-pre-born
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 25,183
|
|
2nd January 2012, 11:57 PM | #229 |
In the Peanut Gallery
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 54,894
|
|
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill |
|
2nd January 2012, 11:57 PM | #230 |
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 13,389
|
Please go back and read the thread. If you want me to concede that perhaps "demand" was a poor choice of word I shall. But it doesn't change the fact that in my opinion it was extraordinarily weird to "complain" that the workers at the foundation should be told to post here. Obviously you know what I meant and are playing semantic games. You win. Hope that made you happy for whatever bizarre reason. I still stand to the point that it is in my opinion an annoying request.
|
3rd January 2012, 01:43 AM | #231 |
post-pre-born
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 25,183
|
truethat, since words are all we have here, you gotta start using them more precisely. First you concede on the demand claim but then end with, "I still stand ..." Either you do or you don't stand by your words.
And again with the sloppiness. What you "stand by" is an "annoying request" which is still a long, long way from a demand. No, I am not playing semantic games. If you want to use sloppy language, go for it. But don't bitch when you get called on it. |
3rd January 2012, 02:01 AM | #232 |
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 13,389
|
Wow seriously. Get a life.
|
3rd January 2012, 03:59 AM | #233 |
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 46,332
|
|
__________________
We do these things not because they are easy, but because we thought they were going to be easy. Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. “Perception is real, but the truth is not.” - Imelda Marcos |
|
3rd January 2012, 06:18 AM | #234 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 901
|
|
3rd January 2012, 08:03 AM | #235 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,084
|
|
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him. Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer |
|
3rd January 2012, 10:50 AM | #236 |
Muse
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 901
|
|
4th January 2012, 07:19 AM | #237 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,774
|
OK, firstly, I pretty much agree with everything Wolfman has said. No, there's nothing wrong with the JREF asking for money, and a couple of PMs and emails around their country's traditional begging time are certainly not the end of the world. However, I also agree that it could probably be done better, and the apparent total lack of interest or participation by the JREF in the forum can make requests for money seem rather unpalatable, no matter how understandable they may be.
And despite DJGrothe's claims, I really don't think anyone can seriously argue that the forum and the JREF are not almost totally disconnected, in large part because the JREF appears to have gone to quite some effort to ensure that is the case. For example: What involvement? Other than actually hosting it, what involvement does the JREF actually have with the forum?
Quote:
Quote:
Compare that to here, where you have to make a separate account to comment on blog posts, and there's no indication to such commenters that the forum exists at all, despite it having been a much more appropriate place for such discussion for the last decade. Interestingly enough, I suggested a scheme almost exactly like the one used by The Escapist when the JREF was looking at changing to a blog, before I'd even heard of that site. That was completely ignored in favour of having the forum even more segregated than before. Then we have this: You may not be with the JREF any more, but this seems to be the general thinking. The forum is not a resource, it's just something to put up with, Except that of course the forum is a resource. The goal of the JREF is not to make money, it's to disseminate information and teach about critical thinking. Money is simply a necessity in making that possible. But the forum already does that without needing to raise extra money. Search for any prominent paranormal or skeptical subject, and threads from the forum will often be among the top results. And that's all with essentially no input from the JREF at all. Just think how much more useful it might be if the JREF actually tried to make use of it instead of hiding it away and pretending it's not there. Or look at the MDC as an example. What information can you find out about that on the main site? Pretty much nothing. It exists, and there are some rules. I honestly can't find any more than that. There was almost a blog about it, but after 4 posts over the course of a year, there's been nothing in over 3 years. On the forum, on the other hand, there's a huge repository of applicants, their discussions with the JREF, and the results of their tests, if any. Plus a lot of discussion among members about, and with, the applicants and their tests, much of it ultimately being used in the official negotiations. As far as I am aware, this is the only place any of this information can be found without physically visiting the JREF office and going through their files. That's an incredible resource for the JREF's single biggest and best known activity. It hasn't been touched in 2 1/2 years.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
4th January 2012, 07:46 AM | #238 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
|
4th January 2012, 07:52 AM | #239 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
Excellent post, Cuddles.
|
4th January 2012, 09:51 AM | #240 |
Masterblazer
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 6,843
|
I can't believe people are so mad about this.
|
__________________
Almo! My Music Blog "No society ever collapsed because the poor had too much." — LeftySergeant "It may be that there is no body really at rest, to which the places and motions of others may be referred." –Issac Newton in the Principia |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|