On 25-Jun-07 15:52:22, Martin Sewell wrote:
> At 13:48 25/06/2007 +0100, ray thomas wrote:
>>What better reinforcment for the idea that society is dominated by 
>>political correctness could be given to Martin Sewell and his
>>supporters?
> 
> Quite, I feel vindicated.  To clarify, I would just like to add that 
> I never posted the link in the first place, the web page in question 
> is a personal page and nothing to do with my academic work (I'm a 
> computer scientist) and the text in no way supports fascism or Hitler.
> 
> Having to justify a picture on my own personal web page which I never 
> posted to this list and which in no way supports fascism or Hitler 
> makes the point about political correctness far more effectively than 
> a picture of Hitler ever could!  I've now removed the picture: 
> http://pc.martinsewell.com/

I had not previously delved deeply into much of the correspondence
that has led up to this point. But, in view of Martin Sewell's reply
above, I felt I should establish for myself the details of the events.
The following seem to me to be the key links in the chain.

1. John Barker, "Re: radstats 7. Radstats, and Political correctness."
   Wed, 20 Jun 2007 14:57:59 +0100
   Martin [Sewell],
   Thank you very much for the information.
   Subsequently I found one of your web sites on the web:
   http://[suppressed -- we know what it is]
   And I think your  article on Political Correctness (PC) there is
   important, not least because it puts PC in the context of normal
   scientific/statistical procedure. I hope your article will be
   widely read.

2. Paul Spicker, "Re: Recent correspondence"
   Wed, 20 Jun 2007 21:47:27 +0100
   In commending Martin Sewell's website to us, John does not mention
   that it opens with an extraordinary, idealised picture of Adolf
   Hitler in heroic guise. This may be intended as bravado, but it
   is crassly offensive and places material before the public which
   many of us would wish to avoid. Coupled with the reference to Jews
   in the cited paper by Lind, I think it raises questions about the
   good faith of some recent contributions.

3. Martin Sewell, "Re: Recent correspondence"
   Wed, 20 Jun 2007 23:43:54 +0100
   Paul, et al.
   Re: http://[suppressed as above]

   At 21:47 20/06/2007 +0100, Paul Spicker wrote: "[as immediately
   above]"
   It is normally taken as a given that Hitler was bad, but I actually 
   made it explicit in my very first sentence on the history of 
   political correctness: "Political correctness (PC) is the third great 
   evil arising from Western civilization in the last century."

   Lind wrote: "The members of the Frankfurt School are Marxist, they 
   are also, to a man, Jewish."  So what?  This is a historical fact.
   If I didn't think Hitler and fascism were bad, it would undermine
   the whole point of what I was trying to say!  I can only assume that 
   you've misunderstood.

4. [log in to unmask], "Request to list-owner"
   Fri, 22 Jun 2007 20:57:04 +0100
   [...]
   However I am writing this message to ask the list-owner to exercise
   her prerogatives to terminate conversations on some particular topics.
   I am not concerned with discussions that simply stray some distance
   away from statistics as usually conceived. I am, however, extremely
   concerned that some strands of debate could be giving open house for
   the expression of racist or even fascist ideas, masquerading as
   science. Remember, Hitler had his Race Science.
   [...]

5. Alison MacFarlane, "Message from 'listowner'"
   Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:36:30 +0100
   I have received a number of complaints about recent correspondence
   and consulted the troika and the jiscmail helpline about this.
   On the basis of this, I am drawing your attention to jiscmail's
   policies: [the 3 URLs to the JISCMAIL guidelines]
   On the basis of these I have been advised to remove the two messages
   with the link to the web site with the image of Hitler from our
   archive and have done this. Jiscmail has also advised me to remove
   anyone who does not comply with its policies from the list.


I have now visited the notorious Martin Sewell PC website for myself,
unfortunately after the image in question was removed. So I cannot
judge for myself what impression its presence may have made.

However, if nothing else has changed ion the website, and in view
of the apparent context quoted: "Political correctness (PC) is the
third great evil arising from Western civilization in the last century."
I can well suppose that it was put there as a vivid image to
illustrate evil. Sewell's "PC" website is in any case worth a read,
adopting an approach which should be of interest to statisticians
(whatever their personal views on the question).

Be that as it may, it was indeed not Martin Sewell who first brought
that website onto the list. This was done by John Barker (1 above).
Paul Spicker objected (2 above) to the fact that it contains
"an extraordinary, idealised picture of Adolf Hitler in heroic guise".

Martin Sewell (3 above) responded to the effect that he indeed
"made it explicit [that Hitler was bad] in my very first sentence on
the history of political correctness: "Political correctness (PC) is
the third great evil arising from Western civilization in the last
century." (See my comment above).

Jonathan Rosenhead (4 above) then called on the list-owner "to
terminate conversations on some particular topics." Alison responded
(5 above) by removing "the two messages with the link to the web site
with the image of Hitler from our archive", and that "Jiscmail has
also advised me to remove anyone who does not comply with its policies
from the list."

It is not obvious at all that John Barker intended to draw attention
to the image of AH in posting the URL to Martin Sewell's "PC" website.
Given what he wrote (1 above) it seems clear that he wanted to draw
attention to how Martin Sewel discusses political correctness. The
fact that there was a collateral image of AH (whatever the explanation
of why it is there) seems to me to be coincidental.

Nor can I see that referring to a website which happens to contain
an image of AH (or any other objectionable person) is in itself
a justification for the kind of drastic action which has been taken.
Everything would depend on the reasons why the image is there.

On that basis, I feel that this business has reached a ridiculous
conclusion, for misplaced, distorted and exaggerated reasons.

Therefore, once I have verified that this message has reached the
list, I shall be leaving.

This makes me very sad, because over many years I have much enjoyed
the discussions on the list, and the many "list-friends" I have got
to know.

Goodbye, everybody.
Ted.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <[log in to unmask]>
Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861
Date: 25-Jun-07                                       Time: 18:17:32
------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------

******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************