[ ARC forum 2 ]

Re: ADMIN wants FEEDBACK

Written by Ivan at 24 Jul 2003 14:57:37:

As an answer to: ADMIN wants FEEDBACK written by Robin Stuart at 24 Jul 2003 03:05:27:

>Hi. Robin here

>There always used to be an awful lot of Internet idiots, particularly connected with circumcision subjects ...

In all honesty, sometimes that would include me - we all need to sort internet stuff out with good judgment and education.
>
>I took a short look at AJ and Chimp, I dont want to study the scene for hours, I need to ask regular users, Is Chimp some special sort of trouble maker?
He rather revels in his trollery, but for me, for the most part it's the difference between the perpetual class clown and the occasional jokester - keeping it light's good, so long as it does not make the serious stuff impossible. For a while he was totally inundating the board with irrelevant postings, and that got right annoying.

>Ivan, I noticed your name first because you seem to have a sense of humour which is vital for this game

I am honored.

>, but also Jim AJ Paul B. (the last a name i seem to remember from years ago) ... should the admin awake from his slumber and ban someone from this forum??

>I am averse to banning, 29/F's idea's not bad, although I don't want a situation where obsessive kooks can track me down (I don't think I've been annoying enough to warrant it, but that's what makes 'em kooks, eh?). It also might be worth it to put a limit on the number of posts from one source (not just one name) in a given period of time - that would limit the pestiferous postings and give a breather on some of the heated, poorly though out, exchanges which occasionally erupt.

>Also: please tell me any important developments in the last 3 years.
Such as? I would say the debunking of the AIDS/intact connection based on African statistics - it's been shown that the subSaharan epidemic is caused by dirty needles reused by the clinics, not the intactness and (alleged) promiscuity of southern and central Africa. The publishing of Kirsten OHare's book "Sex As Nature Intended It" qualifies as important as well.

>I imagine there are hundreds of new pro circumcision and anti circumcision sites ... but are there any other truly unbiased sites - Dont wind me up in politics, I mean truly unbiased

I doubt there are any that are truly unbiased. There are those who have given open-minded consideration to the evidence available, and the quality of the purported evidence, and have come to tentative conclusions. But having come to conclusions, those people then have a bias, not as a matter of preconceived notions, but because they have considered the evidence.

>I still have no preferencial treatment.
For what? Circumcision on healthy foreskins doesn't seem to be a treatment for anything. Phimosis can be treated by stretching, with or without the help of betamethasone, and if the resuklts are coming too slow for someone, they are still able to get circumcised; that's why patient and diligent stretching should always be the first choice for phimosis. Of course, for cancer in the foreskin, surgery makes sense. And there is some argument in the case of LSA, since it is thought to be promoted by a humid environment - but I have no expertise at all as to LSA.
> The doctors will sort that out once they are aware of the problems which have been so long hushed up.
>> we should not have a Gregorian chant of unanimity, but a cacophony of voices advocating their views. But NOT tearing down others.
>ho hum .-- something like that
>> Remember that when you wrestle in mud with a hog, you both get filthy but the hog enjoys it.
>What more can I say
>Greetings to my long lost forum
>Robin


Answers: