But now he has no oppurtunity to correct that error.
Good. Then he must abide by the consequences of his behavior. If these consequences are a total lockout from the JREF Challenge then he has no one to blame but himself.
Cpt., I'm really not trying to yank your chain. I'm just plain sick and tired of a society that grants multiple chances for people who behave outrageously. The time for multiple chances to consider behavior is childhood. Once a person is an adult they have to play the cards as they fall. And I, for one, feel not a speck of sympathy for the Iles' of this world. Mr. Iles' freedom to swing his fist ends 1 millionth of an inch before my nose begins.
Why should they go to a website where they hear everyone acts like intellectual elitist asses?
Ah! Now we come to it, don't we? If you think that refusing to lie down in the gutter and allow someone incapable of the simplest acts of common humanity to walk over you is acting 'like intellectual elitist asses', then you have no concept of decent courteous behaviour, either. That one statement, alone, makes me wonder if you are not someone exactly like Mr. Iles who is trying to appear sweetly reasonable.
I have great difficulty in imagining someone brought up to consider his/her fellow humans as worthy of simple, courteous behavior thinking as you do but I'll be the first to apologize if I'm wrong. Perhaps all those years of being forced to answer 'three' to people you classify as 'stupid' has given you an altered outlook.
They should want to go there, because they hear that there is serious discord on the existence or non-existence of the paranormal and how to test for it.
In this particular discussion, they should want to read the JREF website to see if the person making claims of bad treatment is lying, truthful, sane or delusional. The problem is that they won't.
The people who would believe the Iles' of this world, when a clear and objective record of their appalling behavior is easily accessed, are not worth my attention, either. As adults are not free to run roughshod over whoever strikes their fancy, I am not obliged to hold the hands of or spoon-feed adults that which they are capable of learning on their own. If they choose not to learn they are beneath my contempt and unworthy of my time.
They shouldn't worry about the person, what they should worry about is the way this will look to people who will someday read the glib responses that some applicants get. Simply being in the right isn't enough in the court of public opinion. Some here may think that how the public perceives the JREF is unimportant, it's right and that's all that matters. Some of us would like to see Randi or other leading skeptics on the talk show circuit debunking psychics, but if the audience sees them as close-minded or glib (I'm not saying they are) unwilling to even hear what the other side says, they won't want to watch and the ratings won't be there and the woos will be given the air time.
Who cares? Why should anyone worry about the opinions of the deliberately ignorant? Why, Sir, do you feel such a need for approval that you would grant unlimited license to those who would take such license as just another excuse to demonstrate their lack of human decency? Or why would you defend such behavior instead of championing those who refuse to be stomped on? Personally, I think that the only way you could be more 'helpful' to such sorry excuses for humanity would be to give them a knife, throw back your head and point out the location of your carotid. I'd rather not, thank you very much.
It's not respect to act professionally or calmly in the face of someone acting badly, it's making sure that they know you won't go down to their level.
In no way did Kramer act unprofessionally. As I stated earlier, he acted more professionally than I would have done. Allowing knuckle-draggers to treat you badly is the unprofessional behavior, not the reverse.
When you walk into a store how do you want to be treated? With civility, or with contempt?
I expect to be treated in a manner commensurate with my own behavior. What do you find so difficult about this concept?
If you are treated with contempt, would you recommend the place to someone else?
Were I treated with contempt after I had behaved courteously, I would probably rent a billboard. Had
I treated someone with the contempt that Mr. Iles showed Kramer, I would expect to be shown the door. Which is exactly what Kramer did. Personally, I think that Kramer's response fitted the situation to a hair with the possible exception that he neglected to throw in a mention of what Mr. Iles' antecedents might have been doing when they should have been teaching him manners. I wouldn't have neglected that final point and I would have tried to express myself in a way that would carry a sting 50 years later. But, then, I've never claimed to be a
nice person. Just a fair one.
Mr. Iles acted about as badly as one human being can act, given the medium of the written word. And here you stand, stating that Kramer should tug his forelock, say 'Yes, M'Lord' and ignore that Mr. Iles could hardly have displayed more guttersnipe behavior if he tried.
I never said he did nor should he.
On the contrary, you have made a big, hairy deal about Kramer's response to a person who behaved without the least sign of ever having learned to be a decent human being. You are still making that big, hairy deal. Either you approve of Mr. Iles' behavior or you are a charter member of Masochist's Anonymous.
I find your vision of this whole incident to be totally incomprehensible. There is not one part of Mr. Iles' initial post that didn't reek of bullying. The only thing that stops bullies is to smack them down...hard.
One may assume that Mr. Iles has now learned this lesson, at least as far as Kramer is concerned. Sadly, I doubt that you'll ever learn it but you must live your life as it best pleases you.
I wouldn't be you for 100 JREF prizes.
