November 2006 Post of the month nominations

Thanks. I was considering promoting the thread itself here. There have been several excellent posts by various posters. I give NJ extra credit for essentially taking on all comers by himself. His position is well articulated and compelling even if I find it opposite my own.The thread is a good example of people illuminating a potentially heated subject in high tones, rather than low lights.(side note: I particularly enjoyed your description of who is the boss of whom in a democracy)

---

holmes
"What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)

I agree that nem writes very well, and he makes some valid points. His other points, even if I think they are incorrect, nonetheless usually require a response (unlike a lot of the nonsense we see here which is often self-refuting).Edited by Chiroptera, : Remove a potentially inflammatory signature from a thread meant to be non-controversial. And, what the heck, as long as I'm here I might as well edit for clarity.

In Message 165 platypus does a great job of explaining why evolution tends towards Just Good Enough instead of perfection and the connection between environment and traits.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Author: Holmes
Thread: Coffee House - Haggard Thread #2for Message 163 about consent; what it means and why it doesn't factor into the debate over homosexual marriage. It's well written and easy to follow, and I think it will increase the quality of debate in the remainder of the thread. Great job, holmes! I always love to read your posts and I find you to be one of the most even-handed and level-headed members of this forum.

I disagree. That post is Holmes at his worst - misrepresenting his opponents and the debate in general, philosophical logic-chopping, long-winded tirades that are completely off-topic, and of course, a liberal peppering of ad hominem attacks against his opponents.Did I say Holmes at his worst? That's Holmes at his usual, I guess. Nominating that trash as a "post of the month" is deplorable. Did you even read the post?

I'll admit the whole discussion may have been off topic, but none of your other points hold any water. He didn't misrepresent anyone. Gasby specifically asked why consent was a smokescreen, and holmes gave his explanation. The closest he comes to an ad hominem is the first sentence, while I was mostly focussed on the latter portion about consent. Not that you're one to talk about ad hominem attacks. There you go again.

Well, that's 100% false. He's misrepresented the entire issue, as well as NJ's reasons for bringing it up. He's misrepresented several of the responses, as well. Again, 100% false. The post is full of his veiled attacks, particularly several against me, who he supposedly has promised not to respond to. Of course, apparently a Holmes promise isn't any more hoonest than the rest of his posting activity. Wouldn't that make me the expert in recognizing them? Look, it's obvious from your erroneous statements that you haven't given the post anything but the most shallow of readings. Yet you're ready to enshrine it as a post of the month? You're being ridiculous.

NJ didn't bring up consent, which is the main topic of the message. I'd be interested if you could point a few out. If his post is indeed as falacy-filled as you insist it is, I may just change my mind. I'm not enshrining it, I just thought it was a good post. But this isn't the place to argue.

3 of the last 4 messages flat out do not belong in this topic. Crashfrog's first message is of dubious quality. A polite "I disagree, I think the message is a poor one" is one thing. Going off on a tirade is another.Adminnemooseus

---

Forum: [forum=-19]
Thread: AdminNosy banned?
Post: Message 73Holmes provides the best summation and opinion so far of the Percy/NWR discussion that has caused such a row. Well done.Cheers.

Forum: [forum=-5]
Thread: Asexual to sexual reproduction? How?
Post: Message 42While the train wrecks on EvC are interesting, this is an example of why I continue to lurk here. LM writes with some detail on a subject with which he is apparently quite familiar, and I am learning from it.Thanks for taking the time LM.Cheers.

Seconded.

Definate second. I agree it's the opportunity to learn that is the greatest appeal of EvC and this post is a prime example.

thanks to you and buz for the nomination on the internal evc issue post...But also thanks for nominating this post of LM's. I would have likely missed it, but it is something I find quite interesting. I don't believe I've ever seen the development of sexual reproduction put so concisely. I will be copying it for my own personal future ref.This one should be good for anyone wondering how this perverted world got so screwed up. Heheheh... or should I just say how it got to be so cool? Either way its sexy (with info)!

---

holmes
"What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)

Message 86This post is quality rhetoric. It combines clarity with wordsmithing. Some of the words are strong. The message has significant gravity, and plenty of weight.A strong thing with plenty of weight in a gravity-laden environment makes a a good hammer for driving a point home, which Archer does with aplomb.Whether or not you agree with his post, any talent scout would pluck him from that frenzied scrum on the pitch as one of the few pro-athletes.I might, just might, have gone over the top with my metaphors, thanks Archer.Oh - and allow me to sound my appreciation Lithoid-Man's delightful sex post.