James McManus

Someone is shy

James hasn't completed a profile. Should we look for some other people?

Comments & conversations

Noface
James McManus
Posted over 1 year ago
The debate about Graham Hancock's talk
I don't see anything angry and/or indignant in the comments from CChaos. Or was there an additional comment that has since disappeared? And words like 'please', 'should', 'I'm hoping you will', and 'thank you' don't smack of someone telling people what to do.
Noface
James McManus
Posted over 1 year ago
The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk
You're still hung up on the semantic thing? Here's Webster's definition of censor: "to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable [censor the news]; also : to suppress or delete as objectionable [censor out indecent passages]" The act fits the definition. It has nothing to do with government. But really, it's the perceived motivation behind an act that leads people to call it censorship instead of a more benign synonym.
Noface
James McManus
Posted over 1 year ago
The debate about Graham Hancock's talk
So I can assume that if I spend $7,500, only about 50-60% of the content will approach the quality shown on the web? The rest isn't even worth the trivial effort of uploading, and might even make TED look bad? That's useful to know...
Noface
James McManus
Posted over 1 year ago
The debate about Graham Hancock's talk
I find it strange that you're implicitly characterizing TED as a forum for orthodox thinking (except in designated corners), because that's the opposite of what I thought it was until recently. So many of the other TED(x) talks are unorthodox in so many ways, the actual motivation and influences in this case are pretty transparent. Looking back, I suspect you should have just ordered the removal of the videos with no excuses given. That's probably what the presenters were assuming would happen, anyway.
Noface
James McManus
Posted over 1 year ago
The debate about Graham Hancock's talk
Relying on the distinction between TED and TEDx is passing the buck. You can replace "New York Times" with "someone who was licensed to represent themselves as the New York Times-x, for the benefit of the New York Times" and nothing changes in the analogy.
Noface
James McManus
Posted over 1 year ago
The debate about Graham Hancock's talk
What would you call it if the New York Times invited someone to write an article about challenging existing paradigms, printed the article, distributed it to 100,000 people, then after receiving criticism from people deeply rooted in the paradigms being challenged, stopped the presses and moved the article to a little-known informal publication with a fraction of the visibility?