First reaction by Richard Dawkins.

[Coito ergo sum]

What RD doesn’t address, and doesn’t even acknowledge, is the way in which the whole thing was miss-managed. It’s about recognising that people are uncomfortable with change and having a plan in place to manage the process in the right way. Explaining why, listening, reassuring, responding to comments and all that standard text-book stuff. This fiasco would make a great business school case study in precisely what not to do.

A humble admission of “I got it wrong” would be a good start but no, everyone else is at fault. Does he not understand that “splenetic hysteria” is exactly what happens when you seriously screw-up change management?

If I had to hazard a guess, I would suggest the following:

1. Dawkins hasn't recognized that there has been any "mismanagement" and reads the reaction as immaturity;
2. Dawkins doesn't consider it a worthwhile endeavor to waste his time figuring out whether Josh injured the feelings of some grown men and women who for some reason became emotionally invested in what amounted to an online chat room.
3. Nobody ever accused Dawkins of being the "touchy feely" type. "Explaining why, listening, reassuring..." - please - nobody was getting fired from paying jobs. It was a web forum. My guess is that he figures that a new forum will be up in a while and he seems to think, according to his comment on the subject, that people will still be able to post what they want.

I think if this was something we paid for it might make sense to be really irate about it. As for me, thanks for the 18 months, give or take, of fun discussions, debate and all that. Hopefully the new thing will be really good too.

Nothing to do with immaturity, you should read-up a bit on change management.

OK, it's his website and he can do what he likes. In which case he should quit bitching about the results of his transfer plan (or lack of it).

I think it does have a bit to do with maturity. There is change and then there is change. On the scale of things to bitch about, taking down or modifying the RDF chat forum is pretty far down on the list.

[95Theses]

I have to say, I don't know what everyone is pissed off about, other than the fact that all this happened suddenly. I think that that's what set some people off - the fact that this sort of was sprung on the forum without a real clear statement of what's going to happen and when. Then a bunch of people flew into a rage, probably boiling over from being upset at Timonen for not showing them what they thought was due respect. And, then some members of RDF.net forum seem to have really gone over the line with the vitriol, as quoted by Dawkins.

ALL of those quotes come from this forum - AFTER the RD.net forum had been closed.

They are most certainly NOT a response to the letter from Josh that Dawkins quotes - they are a response to Josh's criminal vandalism and Stalinesque behaviour.

That's what I hope someone can prove with evidence via linked sources. Please do this if you can because Richard has been grossly misled.

suppurating rectum. A suppurating rat’s rectum. A suppurating rat’s rectum inside a dead skunk that’s been shoved up a week-old dead rhino’s twat.

From :

Now let's get back to calling this Josh a suppurating rectum ....

Ok. Josh is a suppurating rectum. A suppurating rat's rectum. A suppurating rat's rectum inside a dead skunk that's been shoved up a week-old dead rhino's twat.

I feel better now.

http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... m…#p349715

Or suppose that somebody on the same website expressed a “sudden urge to ram a fistful of nails” down your throat

The bottom line is that I personally am far more offended by Josh's 'handling' of this debacle than I am of the initial decision.

When someone tells me they know that change can be frightening in order to at both times shut me up and patronise me, I get the sudden urge to ram a fistful of nails down their throat.

So, yeah, bad handling.



(I'm glad you've sent a letter. A few well known names with calm and honest opinions might at least wake RD up to what has been done, even if he doesn't care)

http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... ls#p352349

trip you up and kick you in the guts.

From :

For being booed out of the building at the Atheist Convention Australia. I wonder if he has the guts to show his face there?

Good question! If I see the fat-faced little porker wandering around with his camera, I swear I'll trip him over and kick him in the guts. If he is there I am all the more determined to get folks to join me in turning our backs in silent protest when RD takes the stage. He can get that on camera!

http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... 50#p352333

a slack jawed turd in the mouth mug if ever I saw one

From :

Is that really him? Now I've clapped eyes on him, I totally understand. That's a slack jawed turd in the mouth mug if ever I saw one. This is just Revenge of the Nerd really, isn't it.

http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... ne#p352318


So there we have it, every single one from Rationalia, none from RDF.

[M]

There are some people here they would rather not see coming back to the RD forums. Can you guess why? It's not because they're nasty vengeful control freaks, either. It might have more to do with the fact that they're human beings.

Rather than academic robots without feelings?

[eXcommunicate]

Despite my previous comments on the subject, by which I still stand, I also see your point. I think that if anything, the issue here is the suddenness of the decision and the perceived callousness. I can certainly see someone saying "that was bullshit and I'm not going back." To me, though, the reaction here and the sudden about-face, turning Dawkins into some sort of evil enemy is a bit much. Someone in his line of work probably figures this whole uproar is worth about 20 minutes of his time, if that.

Thanks for the reply. Again, Richard Dawkins can piss all over his website and post nothing but YouTube videos detailing the mating habits of fruit flies. That's fine.

But I think addressing the concerns of 80,000 forum members and about 5,000 regular contributors to his website is worth a little bit more than "maybe 20 minutes of his time." And "his line of work"? He's retired. He doesn't do science anymore. He's an author. He gives lectures and book signings. He has fans, thousands of whom built his online community.

[locutus7]

People seem to be operating under a weird misapprehension that Richard Dawkins is an absentee landlord who only hears about what is going on in the forums when he gets reports from his brutal overseer, Black Josh. It's not true -- he is pretty savvy about this internet stuff, and can actually follow what you wild and crazy forum denizens say. And what he has been seeing is not pretty. Just look at this thread and the kinds of abuse people are heaping on Josh Timonen! I guarantee you that he is not browsing the forum here, or was browsing the RDF forums, and thinking, "Gee, these are exactly the kinds of people and comments I aim to encourage". I'd guess he's feeling glad to be rid of some of the riff-raff.

And at the same time, the RDF has lost some good people whose input has been and would be valuable. If those people weren't all baying at Josh in the current witchhunt, that is.

I speak from past experience with forum drama. Take some time and cool off. It's not that important. The people you're blaming really aren't out to hurt you (honestly, Josh is a good guy, his job is simply much larger than shepherding a forum, and those who hate him have really lost perspective), and if you show a little patience and tolerance, you might even be able to get them to help you out with some of your reasonable requests. I'm sure they actually like and respect many of the contributors and the general importance of the social aspect of the forums, but are reasonably concerned about the rather more vicious minority. What I see here doesn't help. There are some people here they would rather not see coming back to the RD forums. Can you guess why?

It's not because they're nasty vengeful control freaks, either. It might have more to do with the fact that they're human beings.

This description of Josh does not match my own experience with him, which I won't belabor here. Just keep in mind that Josh may present an image to celebrities like you and RD that is different than the way he treats people "below him." This is called Kiss Up - Kick Down Syndrome.

[Heresiarch]

To me, though, the reaction here and the sudden about-face, turning Dawkins into some sort of evil enemy is a bit much. Someone in his line of work probably figures this whole uproar is worth about 20 minutes of his time, if that.

That's human nature though. People lash out when they're angry. A few weeks or months from now, the majority of the people spitting bile at the moment will probably end up buying Dawkins' next book.

The real tragedy is that most of the drama could have been avoided if they had a professional PR person, or even just a more mature member of the foundation craft the message that went out informing everybody of what was going to happen and the reasoning behind the changes. A 20-something techie just doesn't have the wisdom to craft that sort of release. I know, because I was a techie in a similar position a long time ago and made a right arse of things myself.

[pzmyers]

Hi PZ, good to see you here. Welcome.

Good job in not getting involved

SIWOTI. It's irresistible.

[Mazille]

People seem to be operating under a weird misapprehension that Richard Dawkins is an absentee landlord who only hears about what is going on in the forums when he gets reports from his brutal overseer, Black Josh. It's not true -- he is pretty savvy about this internet stuff, and can actually follow what you wild and crazy forum denizens say. And what he has been seeing is not pretty. Just look at this thread and the kinds of abuse people are heaping on Josh Timonen! I guarantee you that he is not browsing the forum here, or was browsing the RDF forums, and thinking, "Gee, these are exactly the kinds of people and comments I aim to encourage". I'd guess he's feeling glad to be rid of some of the riff-raff.

And at the same time, the RDF has lost some good people whose input has been and would be valuable. If those people weren't all baying at Josh in the current witchhunt, that is.

I speak from past experience with forum drama. Take some time and cool off. It's not that important. The people you're blaming really aren't out to hurt you (honestly, Josh is a good guy, his job is simply much larger than shepherding a forum, and those who hate him have really lost perspective), and if you show a little patience and tolerance, you might even be able to get them to help you out with some of your reasonable requests. I'm sure they actually like and respect many of the contributors and the general importance of the social aspect of the forums, but are reasonably concerned about the rather more vicious minority. What I see here doesn't help. There are some people here they would rather not see coming back to the RD forums. Can you guess why?

It's not because they're nasty vengeful control freaks, either. It might have more to do with the fact that they're human beings.

Just like in your blog you have shown that you did not understand a single point we have made.

[cowiz]

Hi PZ, good to see you here. Welcome.

Good job in not getting involved

SIWOTI. It's irresistible.

[virphen]

PZ, the problem was never so much a change, even though we didn't like it - it's the lies, and misrepresentation of what actually did take place, and the basic mean-spiritedness of how so many good people who put many thousands of hours of volunteeer work into helping the RDF were treated.

And welcome .

[CJ]

People seem to be operating under a weird misapprehension that Richard Dawkins is an absentee landlord who only hears about what is going on in the forums when he gets reports from his brutal overseer, Black Josh. It's not true -- he is pretty savvy about this internet stuff, and can actually follow what you wild and crazy forum denizens say. And what he has been seeing is not pretty. Just look at this thread and the kinds of abuse people are heaping on Josh Timonen! I guarantee you that he is not browsing the forum here, or was browsing the RDF forums, and thinking, "Gee, these are exactly the kinds of people and comments I aim to encourage". I'd guess he's feeling glad to be rid of some of the riff-raff.

And at the same time, the RDF has lost some good people whose input has been and would be valuable. If those people weren't all baying at Josh in the current witchhunt, that is.

I speak from past experience with forum drama. Take some time and cool off. It's not that important. The people you're blaming really aren't out to hurt you (honestly, Josh is a good guy, his job is simply much larger than shepherding a forum, and those who hate him have really lost perspective), and if you show a little patience and tolerance, you might even be able to get them to help you out with some of your reasonable requests. I'm sure they actually like and respect many of the contributors and the general importance of the social aspect of the forums, but are reasonably concerned about the rather more vicious minority. What I see here doesn't help. There are some people here they would rather not see coming back to the RD forums. Can you guess why?

It's not because they're nasty vengeful control freaks, either. It might have more to do with the fact that they're human beings.

Why should Josh be considered a reasonable sensitive hard working human being when he does not extend the same attitude to the moderators of the forum? Where is his apology to them? Why destroy 13,000 post of mine when only a handful were relevant to him? Selfish spite, nothing more, nothing less as far as I can see?

He made commitments that he broke.

[M]

People seem to be operating under a weird misapprehension that Richard Dawkins is an absentee landlord who only hears about what is going on in the forums when he gets reports from his brutal overseer, Black Josh. It's not true -- he is pretty savvy about this internet stuff, and can actually follow what you wild and crazy forum denizens say. And what he has been seeing is not pretty. Just look at this thread and the kinds of abuse people are heaping on Josh Timonen! I guarantee you that he is not browsing the forum here, or was browsing the RDF forums, and thinking, "Gee, these are exactly the kinds of people and comments I aim to encourage". I'd guess he's feeling glad to be rid of some of the riff-raff.

And at the same time, the RDF has lost some good people whose input has been and would be valuable. If those people weren't all baying at Josh in the current witchhunt, that is.

I speak from past experience with forum drama. Take some time and cool off. It's not that important. The people you're blaming really aren't out to hurt you (honestly, Josh is a good guy, his job is simply much larger than shepherding a forum, and those who hate him have really lost perspective), and if you show a little patience and tolerance, you might even be able to get them to help you out with some of your reasonable requests. I'm sure they actually like and respect many of the contributors and the general importance of the social aspect of the forums, but are reasonably concerned about the rather more vicious minority. What I see here doesn't help. There are some people here they would rather not see coming back to the RD forums. Can you guess why?

It's not because they're nasty vengeful control freaks, either. It might have more to do with the fact that they're human beings.

Why should Josh be considered a reasonable sensitive hard working human being when he does not extend the same attitude to the moderator of the forum? Where is his apology to them? Why destroy 13,000 post of mine when only a handful were relevant to him? Selfish spite, nothing more, nothing less as far as I can see?

He made commitments that he broke.

And got paid for it.

[natselrox]

People seem to be operating under a weird misapprehension that Richard Dawkins is an absentee landlord who only hears about what is going on in the forums when he gets reports from his brutal overseer, Black Josh. It's not true -- he is pretty savvy about this internet stuff, and can actually follow what you wild and crazy forum denizens say. And what he has been seeing is not pretty. Just look at this thread and the kinds of abuse people are heaping on Josh Timonen! I guarantee you that he is not browsing the forum here, or was browsing the RDF forums, and thinking, "Gee, these are exactly the kinds of people and comments I aim to encourage". I'd guess he's feeling glad to be rid of some of the riff-raff.

And at the same time, the RDF has lost some good people whose input has been and would be valuable. If those people weren't all baying at Josh in the current witchhunt, that is.

I speak from past experience with forum drama. Take some time and cool off. It's not that important. The people you're blaming really aren't out to hurt you (honestly, Josh is a good guy, his job is simply much larger than shepherding a forum, and those who hate him have really lost perspective), and if you show a little patience and tolerance, you might even be able to get them to help you out with some of your reasonable requests. I'm sure they actually like and respect many of the contributors and the general importance of the social aspect of the forums, but are reasonably concerned about the rather more vicious minority. What I see here doesn't help. There are some people here they would rather not see coming back to the RD forums. Can you guess why?

It's not because they're nasty vengeful control freaks, either. It might have more to do with the fact that they're human beings.

This description of Josh does not match my own experience with him, which I won't belabor here. Just keep in mind that Josh may present an image to celebrities like you and RD that is different than the way he treats people "below him." This is called Kiss Up - Kick Down Syndrome.

Like Gandhi said, "Judge a man by how he treats his inferiors."

[TBickle]

I speak from past experience with forum drama. Take some time and cool off. It's not that important.

It may be important to others, PZ. For some people, that forum was their only refuge from the barrage of woo and superstition in their daily lives and that outlet was swiftly taken away. The information and knowledge that I acquired from the RDF is important to me and now it is going to disappear.

[num1cubfn]

The negative comments started en masse AFTER Josh decided to not only ban, but to DELETE the accounts of long time, well written, caring people who each had at least 5000 quality posts on the forums. When Josh let the power go to his head, peeople reacted. There MAY have been a small amount of discontent about any forum changes, but we did not get ANGRY or start NAME CALLING until Josh took upon himself to delete tens of thousands of high quality posts for his own selfish, nefarious reasons. He thought that by deleting accounts he could quench the people saying they didn't want change. Instead all he did is make all the good contributors to the site leave.