Sexual misconduct allegations against Radford, Shermer, et al. Part 2

[dasmiller]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

I don't see it as a flaw in the system that plaintiffs are expected to file suit in a jurisdiction that has sufficient minimum contacts with the defendant. As Loren said, the legal team for the defence should feel obligated to litigate this issue.

My comment was more general, however, it's certainly possible to envision a system which actually worked with you to determine which venue was correct rather than letting each venue decide independently whether it was a proper host.

[Dr. Keith]

Originally Posted by dasmiller

My comment was more general, however, it's certainly possible to envision a system which actually worked with you to determine which venue was correct rather than letting each venue decide independently whether it was a proper host.

It's not that hard. Any decent litigator should have spotted this issue. The system works as it is. His attorney is the only glitch.

[Brive1987]

If he refiles, can we assume that Colorado won't rule that BR has too little connection with that state? What happened to the Federal connection?

[d4m10n]

There is no doubt that Colorado has personal jurisdiction over legal residents of Colorado.

[MattusMaximus]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

Dismissed without prejudice. We are back at square one.

Ah, thanks.

See you all in 10 more pages

[Brive1987]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

There is no doubt that Colorado has personal jurisdiction over legal residents of Colorado.

Well that would be logical, but this is the States I'm trying to understand.

[FreddyEH]

Originally Posted by MattusMaximus

Ah, thanks.
See you all in 10 more pages

So I take it you'll offer no defence of your friend Rebecca Watson, who gleefully & widely spread Radford's name as accused of sexual harassment and wrote of how important it is for people to be aware of harassers in skeptical conferences, while ignoring the fact that Karen Stollznow and Matthew Baxter were both arrested for harassment, abuse, and assault? I take it such hypocrisy doesn't bother you?

[d4m10n]

Originally Posted by RemieV

. . . I was bored just now and decided to read the e-mail thread you posted at the link, and I'm not sure how anyone reading that would think Radford didn't sound like a crazy person. Not just that, but entitled to Stollznow's affections though she doesn't want him and wants somebody else, and just... creepy. And weird. Do people reading the e-mails really not feel that way?

Decided to read through the e-mail compilation, too. They sound to me like any other couple that failed to sync up their intentions and feelings at just the right time. I feel bad for both of them. No idea where you're getting the creepy vibe from, to be honest. Can you point to a specific example or two where that happens?

[Lorentz]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

Decided to read through the e-mail compilation, too. They sound to me like any other couple that failed to sync up their intentions and feelings at just the right time. I feel bad for both of them. No idea where you're getting the creepy vibe from, to be honest. Can you point to a specific example or two where that happens?

I had a similar reaction, just two people with conflicting feelings that vary over time. That's just a personal impression though, as I imagine RemieV's is. I think there's nothing there to actually debate.

[d4m10n]

Originally Posted by Lorentz

I had a similar reaction, just two people with conflicting feelings that vary over time. That's just a personal impression though, as I imagine RemieV's is. I think there's nothing there to actually debate.

Let's go back to arguing about Shermer.

[zooterkin]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

Let's go back to arguing about Shermer.

OK, try this.

[malicus]

Originally Posted by zooterkin

OK, try this.

I've been trying to keep a track of the players involved here but this fella Will Misogyny seems to have flown under my radar (if that's not harassment in and of itself).

[Brive1987]

Buzzfeed: "So Myers felt vindicated in his decision. But more important than calling out Shermer, he feels, is cleansing the movement." Herein is the schism encapsulated.

[Joe Random]

Originally Posted by Brive1987

Buzzfeed: "So Myers felt vindicated in his decision. But more important than calling out Shermer, he feels, is cleansing the movement." Herein is the schism encapsulated.

"Here is the instrument of cleansing, my brethren. And nothing quite cleanses like fire."


Burn it down, PZ. Maybe the thoughts of what you might have been will sting a little less.



(edit to add: was going to go with Varys' quote about Littlefinger burning down the kingdom if he could be king of the ashes, but am feeling retro this morning)

[FreddyEH]

Originally Posted by Brive1987

Buzzfeed: "So Myers felt vindicated in his decision. But more important than calling out Shermer, he feels, is cleansing the movement." Herein is the schism encapsulated.

Indeed: swamps drained, movements cleansed. It's nice to hear PZ Myers so explicitly acknowledging his motivations in this witch hunt. He's played a key role in all this, including Stollznow's accusations.

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Is it called the "freethought movement"? First I've heard of it.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally Posted by Brive1987

Buzzfeed: "So Myers felt vindicated in his decision. But more important than calling out Shermer, he feels, is cleansing the movement." Herein is the schism encapsulated.

He's right. Myers has basically disappeared from the conference scene since then.

[colander]

Originally Posted by zooterkin

OK, try this.

That's a long article. Here are excerpts containing two women's accounts of Shermer misbehavior.

From Alison Smith:

Quote:

“I ran into Shermer in the hallway," Smith said recently, speaking publicly for the first time about what happened that night. They began talking, and he invited her to a Scotch and cigar party at the Caesars Palace hotel. “He was talking about future articles we could write, and he mentioned this party and asked if I could come, and I said yes.” At the party, they began downing drinks. “At some point,” Smith said, “I realized he wasn’t drinking them; he was hiding them underneath the table and pretending to drink them. I was drunk. After that, it all gets kind of blurry. I started to walk back to my hotel room, and he followed me and caught up with me.”

On their way from Caesars to the Flamingo, where they were both staying, she chatted briefly with a friend on her mobile phone, she told me. They got to the Flamingo. “He offered to walk me back to my room, but walked me to his instead. I don’t have a clear memory of what happened after that. I know we had sex.” She remembers calling a friend from an elevator after leaving his room. “I was in the elevator, but didn’t know what hotel.”

From Ashley Miller:

Quote:

“The first atheist event I ever went to, I was by myself, I didn’t know anyone,” said Ashley Miller, a South Carolinian who serves on the board of the Secular Student Alliance. “It was the Orange County Freethought Alliance, in May 2010.” She was 25 years old, and she wanted to meet PZ Myers, whose blog she admired. During a break, she approached a table where Shermer was selling his books.

“I went to his table, and he started hitting on me,” said Miller, who had never heard of Shermer before that day. “It was mildly creepy, but it happens. But then he started playing with his crotch while he was talking with me. Basically trying to get my eye to look at his penis through his jeans, just rubbing himself for three or four minutes until I finally extricated myself.”

James Randi's thoughts on the matter?

Quote:

“Shermer has been a bad boy on occasion — I do know that,” Randi told me. “I have told him that if I get many more complaints from people I have reason to believe, that I am going to have to limit his attendance at the conference.

“His reply,” Randi continued, “is he had a bit too much to drink and he doesn’t remember. I don’t know — I’ve never been drunk in my life. It’s an unfortunate thing … I haven’t seen him doing that. But I get the word from people in the organization that he has to be under better control. If he had gotten violent, I’d have him out of there immediately. I’ve just heard that he misbehaved himself with the women, which I guess is what men do when they are drunk.”

Classy.

[d4m10n]

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

Is it called the "freethought movement"? First I've heard of it.

The author of the article seems not to realise that doing skepticism is a bit different than not having any gods or doing counter-apologetics.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally Posted by colander

That's a long article. Here are excerpts containing two women's accounts of Shermer misbehavior.

From Alison Smith:

From Ashley Miller:

James Randi's thoughts on the matter?



Classy.

http://michaelshermer.com/downloads/...-statement.pdf

Do "victims" really not understand how email works?

[Brive1987]

Well one thing is clear. No one with first person experience is accusing Shermer of rape anymore.

Quote:

If she had to do it over again, Smith said, she would not use the word “rape” because “that seems to get people’s backs up immediately

Alison seems capable of amazing flexibility with this rather serious claim.

And third party investigations cleared Radford of assault and did not support KS's specific claims of harassment.

In fact it's instructive that KS's stories of predatory attacks at TAM and JREF culpability were not deemed relevant to a piece whose narrative structure was clearly primed by the SJL. It seems her utility has been recently devalued.

[Brive1987]

I'd be interested in hearing Mattus 'schism, what schism' Maximus views on his friends Buzzfeed opinions. Especially PZ's movement cleansing avenging sword of wrath.

Only 9 more pages before 'the happening'.

[d4m10n]

For those who are into fisking, what are the factual shortcomings in the new grenade post?

[d4m10n]

The only one that really sticks out to me is the bit about Emery's real name, which is Emery.

And the obvious conflation of the skeptic movement with the atheist movement, which seems to run throughout the entire piece.

[zooterkin]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

The only one that really sticks out to me is the bit about Emery's real name, which is Emery.

And the obvious conflation of the skeptic movement with the atheist movement, which seems to run throughout the entire piece.

There's also the apparent acceptance of the idea that the trolls sending death threats and other trash messages are somehow connected to atheism or skepticism. I think that's what annoys me most about the A-plussers and associated groupings, that they lump legitimate criticism in with the trash talk in order to ignore it.

The article also leaves out some significant events in the elevator incident; if Rebecca hadn't abused her position as a speaker to attack Stef McGraw, she probably wouldn't have had the same reaction from Dawkins and others.

[d4m10n]

Originally Posted by zooterkin

I think that's what annoys me most about the A-plussers and associated groupings, that they lump legitimate criticism in with the trash talk in order to ignore it.

Agreed. This happens so often, we should have a word for it.

For example, the upcoming art show at CFI-LA will feature harmless criticism along with really nasty invective. It has been inevitably characterised only in the harshest terms, of course.

[MattusMaximus]

Originally Posted by Brive1987

I'd be interested in hearing Mattus 'schism, what schism' Maximus views on his friends Buzzfeed opinions. Especially PZ's movement cleansing avenging sword of wrath.

Only 9 more pages before 'the happening'.

Not to disappoint you or anything, but I haven't read the article. Been too busy doing other skeptical stuff. Have fun without me

[tyr_13]

I actually had family ask me about this today. They never hear about or talk about skepticism things.

[jjramsey]

Originally Posted by Brive1987

Buzzfeed: "So Myers felt vindicated in his decision. But more important than calling out Shermer, he feels, is cleansing the movement." Herein is the schism encapsulated.

What's odd is there might have been far less of a schism had Smith either (1) come forward herself or (2) at least come forward through a channel far more trusted than a rage blogger like PZ Myers. I'm not sure that Smith had much control over that, though, since it seems that she had first opened up to Carrie Poppy, who then enlisted Myers' help to further boost her signal. It also didn't help that the account as filtered through Myers came off as evasive due to odd phrasing like, "coerced me into a position where I could not consent." It's not clear if that was the fault of Smith, either. Given that Myers later said that alcohol was involved, my guess is that he neglected to quote Smith more fully.

[SimplyAghast]

Originally Posted by jjramsey

What's odd is there might have been far less of a schism had Smith either (1) come forward herself or (2) at least come forward through a channel far more trusted than a rage blogger like PZ Myers. I'm not sure that Smith had much control over that, though, since it seems that she had first opened up to Carrie Poppy, who then enlisted Myers' help to further boost her signal. It also didn't help that the account as filtered through Myers came off as evasive due to odd phrasing like, "coerced me into a position where I could not consent." It's not clear if that was the fault of Smith, either. Given that Myers later said that alcohol was involved, my guess is that he neglected to quote Smith more fully.

I know; I just wish PZ would apologize for his egregious violations against the truth and that his laughable followers would admit that their critical thinking skills are sorely lacking.

PZ could start by removing the original grenade post...

I'm also excited for colandar to acknowledge the glaring inconsistencies and distortions in Smith's evolving story that have represented PZ v. Shermer all along.

Oh, and I also think it's very telling that those who have spent so much time pillorying Shermer here haven't yet dropped in.

[Floyt]

*shrug* Nothing much seems to have changed. Radford vs Stollznow still murky, Shermer pretty much established as a social creep (unless all these shifty womenz are out to get him just for the kicks, of course), PZ still target of choice for those who like their infighting with full horde support.

Boy, what depressing thread. Check back in 10 pages...

[zooterkin]

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

Is it called the "freethought movement"? First I've heard of it.

Well, the term "freehthought" is a fairly old one, and does describe what is also called critical thinking or rationalism. However, its use in this case does suggest an association with the Freethought Blog, where PZ and others post.

The term is used by other atheist and skeptical groups, such as the Texas Freethought Convention, to name but one.

[Brive1987]

Originally Posted by Floyt

*shrug* Nothing much seems to have changed. Radford vs Stollznow still murky, Shermer pretty much established as a social creep (unless all these shifty womenz are out to get him just for the kicks, of course), PZ still target of choice for those who like their infighting with full horde support.

Boy, what depressing thread. Check back in 10 pages...

What part of the case against SA do you find murky? The scaffold supporting that edifice came down a while back.

[Brive1987]

Originally Posted by MattusMaximus

Not to disappoint you or anything, but I haven't read the article. Been too busy doing other skeptical stuff. Have fun without me

Figures.

I have no doubt though, that you will provide us with your 'informed' opinion at some later date.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally Posted by zooterkin

Well, the term "freehthought" is a fairly old one, and does describe what is also called critical thinking or rationalism.

Louie Freeh has a movement named after him? Who knew?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Freeh

[d4m10n]

Originally Posted by zooterkin

Well, the term "freehthought" is a fairly old one, and does describe what is also called critical thinking or rationalism. However, its use in this case does suggest an association with the Freethought Blog, where PZ and others post.

I thought Beckenheim was just being a tad sarcastic about how the article conflates the skeptic and atheist movements together. Maybe reading too much in there.

We now have two pairs of named accusers coupled with named alleged perpetrators of sexual misconduct. All four of these individuals have operated heavily on the skeptical side of the house, so far as I can tell, with relatively little time spent doing evangelical atheism. All the worst accusations spring from events alleged to have happened at a certain skeptic convention in Las Vegas.

I don’t think this is a pattern, yet, just seems a bit curious.

[Lorentz]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

All the worst accusations spring from events alleged to have happened at a certain skeptic convention in Las Vegas.

I don think this is a pattern, yet, just seems a bit curious.

Aha, the plot thickens!

Could it be that there is something about Las Vegas in particular* that makes people behave badly? Are there perhaps more incidents in Las Vegas of people behaving badly? Seems like an interesting hypothesis to explore.

_{*Maybe it's the ley lines there that cause misbehaviour}

[d4m10n]

Originally Posted by Lorentz

_{*Maybe it's the ley lines there that cause misbehaviour}

Maybe the ley lines have encouraged the popular culture and the tourist bureau to create an aura of sexual laxity around the fabled city.

[qayak]

I've read through the evidence available on the Shermer-Smith deal and can't see anything that Shermer did wrong.

It sounds like nothing more than morning after regret on the part of Smith.

[d4m10n]

Originally Posted by qayak

I've read through the evidence available on the Shermer-Smith deal and can't see anything that Shermer did wrong.

Really?