You are not counting whether lots of "mobs" insisting to delete one user account he never changed his mind that "doubtable not guilty". It's his courage, and lots of you forgot in your "democracy".

@picantecomputing
You can bomber a house in iraq when they are celebrating their wedding. Because they have celebration by shooting into the sky in their culture. It can be doubtable against US army. You can do so. You can kick out Wate because he is doubtable. You can kick out dlb, because his capacity to be an admin is doubtable. You can kick out yourself because you would never understand what you are talking about. Things started when people overacted against dlb's reply. You reported only evidences. You have never had any solid proof, not at this moment neither. Dlb tried to be as democratic as he can. And you are not. That's what happened accurately.

To be frank, I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. I wish I did, as I'd love to respond. Seriously - your comments are borderline ranting with no discernible line of reasoning. I wish there was some logic in there I could try to refute.

And where is all this about Iraq coming from? Why, because I'm American? If you think that the vast majority of Americans don't despise the war in Iraq, then you don't follow international politics and you have no idea how much Americans in general disapprove of the U.S. government at the moment. Try Googling for poll results - you'd serve yourself well to know what you're talking about before you try to lump Americans into one little box. Don't try to impugn my character with the naive tactic of associating me with something hated the world around.

And since you still don't quite understand, this is NOT ABOUT WATE. Clear enough?

Truly though, if you can weave a coherent argument into your words, I'd really appreciate the chance to respond. It appears you have loyalty to DLB to the end, with or without reasoning, and I REALLY don't want to spend my time joining in the bickering. I think I've said all I need to say here, and my words stand for themselves. The community can make their own judgments based upon what has already been said. I will say this, you are certainly passionate about this issue - I just wish I knew why. You seem to be a person of principles, and for that I can respect you, but I'm honestly not quite clear on what exactly those principles might be.

Terve, I personally don't see dlb's democracy. if he was truly democratic he would have let us protest in peace.

So what did he do?

He deleted the team without a "Is there any way we can work this problem out?"
In matter of fact he said absolutely nothing. The moderators there also said nothing.
Is that democracy? I do not think so.

Oh and BTW, Terve, if you see peaceful protest as undemocratic and single-handed action on the part of authority - without possibility for redress of grievances - as democratic, I'd love to know what civics book you've been studying. What you're saying is so completely wrong and backwards that I don't even know where to begin. I really think you need to check out a few topics on Wikipedia, as your argument not only doesn't make sense, it's just plain incorrect - and I don't think it's a matter of interpretation. I'm sure throughout history those in power have thought of protesters as "mobs," as you put it. Democracy is, among many things, power within the people and the right to challenge authority for injustices. If you can't see how this situation fits that model, then I pity you, because you're missing a chance to see modern Internet democracy in action. Instead you make arguments for The Man and attempt to convince others that DLB is the one who has been wronged. Again, are you DLB? Because he's about the only one that might have a vested interest in believing that kind of a$$-backwards logic.

Please, please, please, for the good of this discussion, go and check your assumptions about democracy, because it is completely out of step with the rest of the free world.

dlb is as democratic as any despot.
He never gave a single explanation for his actions and non-actions.
He never even tried to discuss anything.
He did the best he could to supress any discussion on his boards.
He even punished innocent bystanders on his massive action against any dissent.

We tried to argue.
We delivered evidences.
We asked (in the beginning) polite questions.
We started beeing not so polite once he behaved like a dumb despot.

I can only agree with picantecomputing, your view of what is democracy is nearly the absolute opposite of the universal accepted definition.

You can only discuss with one, who is discussible. If one say: The sky is green and all others can see, that the sky is blue, no discussion is furthermore useful. If Terve not have arguments for his part and now try to attack on a personal level, he is for all time here marked and it's better for him, he changed his nick. Everyone now know, what attitude of mind he have.

Sometimes I think, he is a victim of a brainwash, like it's usual in some sects. In such cases you can see similar reactions. Then you can't find any way for a compromise and they meaning, they are right and you are false. No way for a compromise. It's really a great pity, it's the first time in my life, that I meet someone without any chance for a meaningful discussion.

In german we say: "Betonkopf". Don't know, if the translation "reactionary die-hard" is the same, but if, it's exactly what I mean.

Please, settle down, does anyone besides me understand that there is a language barrier here? Terve2 is difficult to understand, as English is obviously not the first language, but if you put a little thought into it, you can see what is being said. picantecomputing misunderstood the meaning of Terve2's post and took offense to it. People in different cultures have different customs. Terve2 was merely pointing out one possible misunderstanding resulting from these differences. If ANY soldier (American, German, Japanese, ANY) saw a group of people firing guns in the air, that would make the soldier nervous and raise suspicions. But if you try to see it from the perspective of the wedding party, there is absolutely no danger, it's part of their customs. Have any of the B4L team ever even remotely attempted to see the repeat bannings from DLB's point of view? DLB tells users to go away, they don't, then he had to use force. And there is no freedom to assemble peacefully on someones PRIVATE property (the forums) if the owner asks them to leave. They are private property for public use. I don't like Wal-Mart's treatment of their employees. Does this mean I can gather all my friends that agree with me and assemble in the parking lot, informing people as they walk by of my beliefs? If management tells me to leave and I don't, guess what will happen... the police will come. If I still won't leave and they have to drag me out kicking and screaming, that would make me an aggressor and I would loose any credibility to protest Wal-Mart's practices. At first glance, DLB's reactions were outrageous, but when you see what the crowd did in response, DLB's reactions are warranted. Any members lost any and all rights when they created a second account after being banned the first time, why can't people see that? And why can't the folks that were banned accept the fact that they were banned? What do you think "banned" means?

I see other users using some awkward English statements which leads me to believe that a fair number of the issues are language barrier related. Misunderstandings are very dangerous when the issues are international.

If he did I was not aware of it


Actually, yes you can. We stopped no one from being able to crunch or join P@H. As for wal-mart, Police only come if they get disorderly or if people start physically getting in the way.

Well put arguments though.

Beside the discussions here I want to put some progress on the idea of the open letter to Predictor:

Okay, after considering all suggestions that were made across the forums and private messages I want to announce the following text as the one that should be sent to Predictor@home and Scripps Institute administration

Please spread this suggestion together with the text around each team you can find. Each team should make a poll about if they want to put their team name on this letter. They should also inform their members mybe by email to get a good representation of the opinion. Teams should "sign up" by sending an email to "against.censorship AT gmx.net", best with a link to the result of their poll (to know these persons are authorized to speak for the team). Deadline should be end of June.



German version:

Yes, I think you're right - there is a language barrier here, and kudos to him for making the effort to go outside his first language. BUT, I think if I were to post something in his native language, I would be a lot more careful with my words and maybe figure out exactly what I was saying before just blurting it out. He's been pretty vehement in his opinions, which in my opinion deserves a strong response. Yes, he may be out of his element in terms of the language, but I can only respond to what's written - not what's in his head. I truly did not get what you got out of what he said. But your explanation makes some amount of sense. I still totally disagree with him and I think his views on democracy are a bit warped. But yes, he's at a disadvantage. I really just think if you're going to say something, be clear on what you're saying. If I were to write something in German or some other language I'm not fluent in, then I would have to bear some responsibility for what I'm putting out there. Your point is well taken though. Thanks for pointing that out.

And just as a side note, I'm really not defensive about being American. My country is flawed. I still love living here, but it is flawed big time. I really thought he was trying to paint me as the "ugly American," which I am very far from. Hence my response. Again, something was definitely lost in translation.

Your question is an interesting one, but I think the comparison with the Predictor situation is weak. Society at large is governed by law, and the police maintain order. That's out there. In "here," there are no police, so to speak. Predictor does have authority do ban members on their own. But that's not the question! The question at the heart of all this is whether they were RIGHT in doing so, not if they HAD the right. CAN they? Sure - that's just a technical issue. SHOULD THEY HAVE? That's an entirely separate question - and my answer would be "no." Again, nothing happened to me personally. I'm just advocating for those I think got the shaft in this whole situation. As I understand it (and please, Terve, don't start in about evidence again), at first the inquiries about the situation were relatively polite, and they were responded to with a very heavy hand. If that's all a big lie, and they were in fact being malicious, then we have a whole different story. But multiple people are saying the same thing - that their rather benign inquiries were trampled underfoot by DLB, and they were banned.

Okay, so let me put it to you this way, using the Wal-Mart example. If you went to the customer service desk, asked for the manager, and asked them a few non-threatening, benign questions about their hiring practices, employment policies and benefits packages, and in return the manager kicked you out of the store and banned you from ever shopping there again, how would you feel? COULD she physically do that, via support (in the real world) from the police? Sure, probably. SHOULD she? I can't believe that you'd say "yes" to that, if it happened to you personally. I think most people, in that position, would start making calls to Wal-Mart corporate, their friends and the media to expose the injustice. Maybe even call for a boycott. Is this sounding at all like the Predictor situation? To me it's quite parallel.

Now, if you were to go into Wal-Mart and start shouting obscenities and throwing merchandise around (i.e., intentionally disrupting the flow of business), then yes, you're going to get tossed and probably receive an injunction which would keep you off the premises. That's a totally different situation.

So, my question is, (1) what exactly was asked of DLB that caused the bannings and (2) what was the intent of those asking questions? If you're talking about questioning Wal-Mart's employment practices, then I think the intent is pure and admirable (and this goes on all the time in the US). And if the requests about the whole Wate credit situation were to help expose an unfair/unjust situation that was going on inside Predictor, then again I support that 100%. Did anyone try to crash their server? Did anyone hack into their system, as Predictor claims? I can't say 100% that that didn't happen, but I highly doubt that there were multiple people involved in that kind of thing here, if it happened at all (which I also doubt). If Terve wants to talk about evidence, then let Predictor show its evidence of "attacks" against it. THAT would justify the bannings against ONLY those that precipitated the attacks. But if we're just talking about people asking questions about what seems to be a dubious decision made by Predictor, then isn't this all kind of silly and totally out of hand on Predictor's part? Couldn't they just have explained themselves, deleted Wate's account and disposed of his credit? This sounds so much like a corporate cover-up (and no, I'm not going conspiracy theory here). I'm just saying that it's so much easier to admit a mistake before it gets out of hand than to start squashing any who speak out against you. Really, what Predictor has now is a PR and credibility problem, and that's their own fault. If it had all been brought out in the open at the start, none of this would have happened, and we wouldn't STILL be talking about it.

So what does Predictor expect when it acts in this way? Acquiescence? Actually, I think what they expected was silence, via the bannings. But the plan has backfired and spread to other forums, and here we are, on the verge of an organized protest and potential boycott.

If I have a suggestion for Predictor, it is this: issue a mea culpa, restore the deleted accounts, restore the rightfully earned credit, undo the improperly assigned credit, and work to rebuild your image. Because just like a corporate scandal, this isn't going away until the issue at the heart of this whole matter is addressed. Until then, those wronged have nothing to do but stand up for themselves and punish Predictor for its handling of the issue via peaceful and organized means. This seems an obvious case of mishandled authority, and history has shown time and again that you just can't do that and get away with it forever. Predictor has, in my opinion, gotten more than it bargained for when it started deleting accounts. So come clean already, and maybe we can all move on to a more constructive issue, like the science behind the research maybe, which is what I think most of us are here for.

I was one of the people that was banned/wiped from Predictor. Why? Because I did not like the treatment that dlb was giving people who were asking questions. I do believe that some people did over-react to things and may have said things that were offensive. On this I can understand bannings. However, I never said or did anything that went against forum rules. I was never warned nor was I just banned for a peroid of time. Just one day I was wiped. My crime was to have been a member of Banned for Life. Ask anyone if I ever wrote anything that was nasty or derogatory. After being wiped, I did re-create my account. dlb (I believe) even said it was easier to just wipe the whole team than individual accounts. So I believed that the reason I was still allowed to re-join was because he didn't actually mean to wipe everybody. I was wrong. He wiped me again and then blocked by IP address.

I wrote a letter about a month ago asking why:



As you might be able to guess I received no response.

@Terve you wrote: What? Reprisals for the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor??? I understand the Iraq wedding comment but this one escapes me.

That was what happened before Pearl Harbor. At that time, politically US made Japan to start against US. It's that history.

Anyway,

picantecomputing, so now you are the police in BOINC society ? Then you should kick out somebody who pointed Wate as guilty (although it would be, "suspicious" does not mean guilty). Why you don't do ? Dlb was mentioning about it. That's why he was posting "just someone writing to the board is not enough to edit one's account". Someone ordered to delete that account, whether dlb posted that comment. He deleted couple of threads which was similar matters with first opened thread. Then some people started claiming on it. He was mentioning also about the incident, which was not posted in the mailing lists where admins join. Claiming escalated and dlb decided to ban. What is wrong with his decision ? Maybe Acmefrog could claim about it (although I don't remember whether he made any post at that moment). But majority of others who could not control oneself and bombering onto dlb did not make "banned-out". They created new accounts again and again. That was already "malicious hacker" act.

If you do still, then other projects like SETI or CPDN or any project could be next. You would say you know the borderline. Do you know whether every member on the BOINC know that borderline ? What is exact borderline ? Once if this kind of act were allowed, who can stop next ? Is your act really save the BOINC ?

The admin is the only person who controls the sites the admin manages. That's all. If it were out of border, none will connect to the site. That's all.

The "Wate"-account hacked other peoples computers. It's absolutely irrelevant whether the original creator of that account did it or someone who hacked into it, the account was bad now.

It's one of the duties of an admin to protect other puters from harm done by his puter. The admin (dlb) knew from mid-February on that his puter did harm to others through the "Wate"-account., but he decided not to act against this hacking.

The concerned community didn't stop posting about this hacking, and after a month the admin decided that he didn't want to be bothered by comments about his inaction (and complicity with a hacker) any more and began to act quite heavy handed against all who dared to critizise him.

The board is the right place for such issues, period. No secret mailing needed, and if dlb took his job as an admin serious, like the other projects admins did, he would have acted in February.

He may have the right to act this way, as it is his server, but has no right not to be named a dictator and incompetent, because he is just that. (Analogy to Walmart (or Lidl here in Germany): They may have the right to ban concerned customers from their property, but they don't have the right to silence the public about their abusive empoyee treatment.)

Most of us will probably like to crunch for the science of Predictor, but not if they act in such a shameful way, betraying all concepts of openness, fairness and democracy. If they kick dlb out, like he deserves, lot's of us will come back.

Terve, as far as WWII goes, I'm sure every country teaches history to its children differently, so I have no doubt that we see those events differently. History is biased because it is nearly always written with some sort of agenda. What's more, I couldn't possibly have less interest in having a debate about WWII with you, so I'm just going to leave this one alone.

As far as your claim that I'm the BOINC police, I'm not sure how you figure that, since I have no power to restrict anyone from doing anything, have done absolutely nothing to inhibit anyone from going about their business, and am only advocating on the behalf of a group of BOINCers that seem to have been wronged. Again I think you seek to paint me as an aggressor when in reality it's the opposite. If you want to identify the "police" in this situation, Predictor itself is the only one with any such powers.

And I've said this like three times now, so here goes again: I DON'T CARE ABOUT WATE - HE IS IRRELEVANT TO THIS DISCUSSION!!! IT'S THE ACTIONS THAT FOLLOWED AND HOW THE INQUIRIES WERE DEALT WITH BY PREDICTOR THAT CAUSED THE CURRENT SITUATION. Let's just say, for argument's sake, that Wate is 100% innocent. The folks that made inquiries to DLB still had a right to make their inquiries and ask questions, this being a public community with many interested parties engaging in public discussion. Wate's guilt or innocence DOES NOT MATTER. The right of those who asked questions of Predictor is still there, whether Wate is guilty or innocent. If you want to keep bringing Wate up, I just won't respond to it anymore, because I'm starting to think you're just trying to inflame the discussion by continuing to bring it up. Or maybe that's the only argument you have, and you have nothing else constructive to say. Personally, any mention of Wate just doesn't matter to me anymore. Troll if you want - be my guest. But you're only hurting your position by doing so.

I'm not claiming to "know" anything about the events that led up to the bannings. I've said more than a couple of times here that I was not affected, and so I have no vested interest. But from the anecdotal evidence of a fair number of folks, it seems very clear to me that they had the right to ask questions of DLB. If you don't believe in the rights of someone to ask questions, Terve, then you simply DO NOT understand the democratic process, and it's no wonder we disagree! As I've said, if the simple asking of questions caused the bannings, then that is just plain wrong. Period. End of story. Yes, it seems later some users became a nuisance by creating multiple accounts. While I don't necessarily think that was a wonderful plan, it doesn't constitute "hacking," and I think you know it. We all know it. It's laughable to compare that with cracking passwords and stealing sensitive information. If you can't agree to that, then I don't think you have any credibility at all in this discussion. But BEFORE all that happened, if it was just simply asking a few questions that got folks banned, then I simply don't know how you can fail to find Predictor at fault. If you can't, then I personally am done reading your posts and will just skip over them in the future, because I think you're in this discussion just to win it, not to resolve it. IMHO, getting banned for asking questions alone is absurd on its face, and I defy you to explain to me otherwise.

Where is the power in a democracy coming from? Where is the money for the police coming from? It's coming from the people. In the case of BOINC the crunchers are the people. And in politics the opinion of the people counts, not the opinion of the president. We were taken the right to protest at Predictor forum. That is fine, they can send us away from there. But they can't stop us from protesting. They decided wether to make us dicusss with them or without them.
Now this is what we have: we have people (or teams as some kind of parties) giving a petition to a president they are not happy with. We are not hiding this petition. We do not do anything against Predictor, we are only pointing out our concern which no one can prohibit. And the more people that are pointing out their concern, the more it will be heard. And I'm sure our concern will be heard all over the world! This is the time where lot's of people around the world come together with a common aim, speaking in one voice.
But this is our voice, it may not be yours. So, have yours and let us have ours.

Yes, people has right to ask. But people has no right to order or to insist. This was what I could see at that time. Haven't you see so with native eyes ?

Wate matter was a starting point. You cannot close your eyes. Things went wrong at that time. Escalated. Dlb and your side both are involved from that time on !



You could show solid proof, or asking to investigate abnormality and freezing the account so as to keep things smart, via e-mail. You would never respond because I am to inflame the board ? Then Dlb not responding on the board also has no reason to be blamed, hahaha. It's such simple. You are allowed. Dlb, me, and some of else who have different ideology are not allowed. That's your police' policy.

I am beginning to think T****2 = W***

You are really making me wonder that.

Please change my mind.

Ehm, what's your problem ?
Do you hope that people will change their opinions because you are saying still and still the same things ?
You have your opinion about things, we have our opinions, that's all.

100% agreeing. Nothing to add.

Yah, me too. As Kokomiko said in an earlier post, "You can only discuss with one, who is discussible. If one say: The sky is green and all others can see, that the sky is blue, no discussion is furthermore useful." I've personally said everything I want to say on this issue and more, and I believe Terve may be trolling at this point. His intentions may have started honestly, but now it seems he's just arguing to argue, since he's not making any new arguments - just the old one rephrased slightly. So Terve, I am done with you. The discussion stands for itself at this point, and it looks like the protest may be nearly underway, which is wonderful. You can continue to post until the end of time, but I won't be responding to you anymore, unless you genuinely have something new to say. Which I seriously doubt.

Good luck to ThEfT and the others organizing the protest - I hope it goes well and yields some results.

What arguments ? If I were dlb, I would do similar manner what he did. Just a bit of difference (announcing in advance, that would be the only difference), but I would rather delete B4L team without warning.

If "freedom of speech" is for you "anything you can insist", it would be the end of the world. That's all. For some people who understood what happened exactly at p@h, they can imagine your protest would give some results, bad ones.

At least some of your side seem to have fun with doing things (at least at the board on p@h), and you would not seize those people doing just for fun.

Democracy is not what you are telling me. It may US style, but not in general. Minorities should be protected (in this incident, a person "Wate" may be the one at the initial stage). You failed to do so. That's why I could know you have no democratic ideology.

I no need to make new arguments. The only thing I make is trying not you to overact just as dlb did so. If you do, you are same as dlb.

Terve, are you saying that Wate, or the person who used his account, is a minority that needs to be protected? Wate is in fact very fortunate that nobody in Berkeley or at the affected projects or in the police had time to prosecute him and take him to court. Such investigations and prosecutions are extremely time-consuming, and the international dimension would have made matters even more complicated.

I hope the team email can be sent to Predictor because nothing seems to have changed or improved:

http://predictor.scripps.edu/forum_thread.php?id=2609

Mo.v., so you mean suspicious does mean guilty ? Because many of you tried to execute, dlb tried to protect the minority. What's wrong with it ? It's the real democracy, isn't it ? Else in your comments are rather execuse for your defense.

If I were Wate, and if my account were abused, I would notice it not in time. And if I saw some threads pointing on my account, I would have no chance to come out to the Boinc society.

That's fine. This letter is no overaction - it is not even an action. It is just an expression of the opinion of many and especially those who sign it. If a team wants to make an action on it, it's on them.