Meatbrain reminds me of a problemed foster child. One who admits he couldn't care less about society, and that he is abusive. He demands, demands, demands. But when it comes to giving -- he's exempt. He demands proof, but can never give it. He always accuses people of lying, but probably 90% of that is simply his quoting out of context or trying to put words in other's mouths. The other 9.9% are things that are easily clarified, and the last .1% is maybe a contradiction (rather than a lie). To my knowledge he hasn't proven anyone has lied yet.
While in and of itself only a moderately interesting blip on the over-all radar, a there is sort of convergence with Carpenter's own personal administration lockdown at Volokh that makes this interesting to me. Carpenter is the contributor there who writes mainly about his conservative neutering the definition of marriage. However, when called on a few of this claims, (much like Meatbrain) he decided that the comments were way to numerous and needed to be thinned. And that he should close comments much quicker.
One is a scholar, the other is definitely not.
For Meatbrain, it all started when Ed Brayton was deleting Opine posts on his site. You might know this site, its called "Science blogs" but since I've yet to see a real scientific treatment of any topic, I conclude that science must mean anti-religion to them.
It wasn't the first time Ed did this, and most certainly won't be the last. But I read where one commenter at his site was complaining that he didn't have access to comment on another person's site. I sent him this email, which quotes the complaint he registered at Brayton's site:
Funny you should make this comment on Ed Brayton's blog:
And, as always, Gribbit> the Dip[..] lacks the guts to actually discuss his ideas with anyone: "Gribbit's threads have comments closed".
We have a collection of what we call Brayton's greatest hits. You might like to give them a read:
Part 1
Part 2
I have to be honest, even Alan who came over to Opine ran scared after a few comments.
So, what is your take? In absence of Gribbit, here is my take on the subject, and the comment section is open.
What ensued were numerous accusations, demands, and other gaffs on Meatbrain's part. You can read the thread, its really quite fun. For instance, he claims to be above having to make an argument or backing up any of his claims (something Op-Ed caught him with later on). But the most interesting was his sheer avoidance of condemning Brayton's administrative lock-down when he was so quick to condemn Gribbit. He instead focused on there being a difference between deleting posts, and closing all posts. I can agree to that, for instance deleting posts can be more prone to abuse. Either way I never got him to condemn the action, so I waited.
As time went by Meatbrain continued to come in and do his little routine for all of us to watch. He would also talk on his own website about what he considered victories in catching others in their lies. But he never did so about Opine, even though he seemed very confident in his claims about us. He would demand, quote out of context, and other dishonest means to accuse others of lying. While pointing out is errors, I bidded my time. I was waiting for a less personally involved time when the conversation had nothing to do with me, and a time when he felt at the peak of his confidence and pride.
Then, I deleted his comment just as I threatened I would. I can hear his screaming keyboard as he types out messages of how I promised I wouldn't delete his comments. Well, I didn't delete those comments, now did I?
Now, he takes it over to his site (which is fine since it saves me the hassle of re-creating his post for honesty's sake). And it wasn't long before I got his admission about deleting comments specifically.
Deleting a comment to avoid the necessity of providing factual support for a claim is intellectual dishonesty.
Although I think in general people would agree though that it is dishonest to use your admin powers to remove arguments you could and should be meeting with facts and reason. Especially when those comments are counter-arguments to your own, and deleting them helps falsely bolster your own argument. But it is enough to show that by his argument, Brayton is dishonest.
And, in an interesting twist, Meatbrain has now banned my IP addresses, on almost the same day Carpenter did. He has also kept a comment (which I will copy below in the comment section) from leaving the moderation queue. I asked him why. I told him I expected him to release the comment for everyone to read (which showed once again that for the most part Meatbrain was being deceitful in his accusations). Well, he deleted that comment too. Here is the snapshot with the comment, and here is the snapshot shortly thereafter (taken with the help of a proxy because of Meatbrain's IP ban).
It seems petty to discuss being banned as if it were an indictment of their arguments. And I could agree with that. The point really is that I'd rather discuss their views with them and their readership, but I'm at a loss as to why that opportunity is being denied -- even at sites with such intellectually propriety and free exchange of ideas as Volokh (though to his credit it seems Prof Volokh had nothing to do with it according to an email conversation with him).
So the moral of this story is, live by the accusation, die by the accusation.