|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,915 Year: 4,172/9,624 Month: 1,043/974 Week: 2/368 Day: 2/11 Hour: 1/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: General discussion of moderation procedures | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
The issues currently being discussed are not new. Many relevant good messages already exist. I encourage all, and especially the newer members, to go back and read from the beginning the "Suggestions and Questions" topic that is the precursor to this topic.
You don't need to go all the way through message 302 there, but I do suggest at least perhaps the first 100 messages.
Change in Moderation. Adminnemooseus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
Everyone - Quit the sniping back and forth. Nothing good is or will be coming from it (other than maybe give me ideas that the participants might all need suspensions). WARNING! WARNING! WARNING!
I also still recommend the reading of the cite in message 121. Going to close this topic for a while. Any real, worthy comments will need to wait for it's reopened. MEANING: DON'T START A NEW GRIPE TOPIC - Doing such WILL induce a suspension. Adminnemooseus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
Topic reopened.
See previous message - The recomendation and WARNINGS there still apply. Adminnemooseus This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 05-05-2005 11:06 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
I think we may need to restart the "Boot Camp" for some of you.
Closing this topic for a while. DON'T START ALTERNATE TOPIC! Adminnemooseus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
If you're going to post here, make it good.
Adminnemooseus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
From here.
Godfearingatheist writes:
Ken the author of : 'keep rolling along Deep in my heart[blah BLAH ... ]'" ******************************************************************* Ken ??? Ken Who? An Administrator here at the Forum ???"Creationist Admins are subject to suspension EVEN as an Administrator, huh? No? (?) If an Adminstrator gives a short Link they're not some pain in the ass for doing that WHAT AM I TALKING ABOUT ex. Below Url/LINKEx. NOVA | Transcripts | NOVA scienceNOW: April 19, 2005 | PBS >> > I find the Adminstration very Helpful ;-) In an Example from what follows: ....Is there some REASON to believe one way or another? It would be interesting if there's any evidence available that is regarding this or to be discussed. No or Yes! NOVA | Transcripts | NOVA scienceNOW: April 19, 2005 | PBS |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
Ignoring the thinly veiled insults from Adminnemooseus Re: Rrhain is a very intelligent person - Closing topic My comments there are my sincere beliefs - Really and truly. No insults intended. The very humble Adminnemooseus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
Rrhain has stated he doesn't care if he's pleasant to talk to. Here's the problem. In both threads where his focus has become to expose truthlover's evil, the thread ended. Not only did my participation end, but so did Crashfrog's, Schrafinator's, and everyone else's, except those trying to control Rrhain's public tantrum.
In other words, whether Rrhain's crusade against me was righteous or not, it didn't help EVCforum. I love that last sentence. Personally, I don't know and at this point don't care who was right and who was wrong. The bottom line is that there was a major disruption of the forum operations over a rather insignificant detail.
So, to Rrhain and anyone else involved in the posting of so many words and messages about this whole affair - DROP IT; LEAVE IT BEHIND. I suggest to the various admins, that automatic suspensions be passed out to any member who does not follow the above request. I am once again going to close this topic for a while, so that this message doesn't just get buried in the pile. If you have comments/questions about moderator issues, save them for when the topic reopens. Adminnemooseus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
participents may wish to look at the previous message, especially if you haven't before.
Adminnemooseus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
Adminnemooseus writes: So, to Rrhain and anyone else involved in the posting of so many words and messages about this whole affair - DROP IT; LEAVE IT BEHIND. Re: Messages 224 and 225 of this topic. Rrhain suspended for yet to be determined amount of time. Adminnemooseus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
See here.
Adminnemooseus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
The AlasdairJC ID has been deleted.
It has also been added as an alias to your Alasdair ID, such that (I hope) all the messages created by both ID's will be connected to you. Admin/Percy - Please confirm that this process I just did is the way to handle such things. Adminnemooseus Added by edit: OK, at the moment it seems I've just turned AlasdairJC into an unregistered member. This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 05-14-2005 04:28 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
wj writes: Percy, you can't threaten me like that! I think I've said it before, and I'll say it again - You input into considerations of moderation issues is outstanding. The question is, do you function as such best as an "outsider", or should you also be an admin? I guess it's your decision - But if you are interested and willing to be an admin, please send me an e-mail. Once again, I must applaud Sylas/AdminSylas for his message 234. He has expressed my position far better than I ever could. I would in particular like to repeat the following:
Sylas writes: The use of majority votes is not feasible. The reason for having several moderators is to divide the workload, not multiply it. Now in fact, it's fairly common to solicit opinion from other moderators; and that did occur in this instance. But it is not required. If we have a topic that has turned into an "out of control mess", the reality is that something needs to be done as soon as possible (ASAP). While the various admins may and have had "Private Administration Forum" discussions on particular issues, it still comes down to being that an individual admin needs to do a summary judgement and do a summary action. This action may or may not prove out to be the best possible choice, but under the ASAP need constraint, an admin needs to "do something, even if it's wrong".
wj writes: However I thought the comment in message #206 seemed to be inconsistent with what I expected from the board. I think such is an example of such a "summary judgement and action".
wj writes: As members are not privy to the communications between moderators and policies which might have been adopted between moderators on a particular issue what is left to members is to raise issues and ask questions until they think they understand the position and put in their 2 cents worth. I think the various admins do try to be open to the general membership, about what the individual and collective admin positions are, but just as much of everything else at this forum, good and important information tends to get lost in the clutter. Work is currently underway, in the "Private Administration Forum", to try to come up with a method to prevent this "lost in the clutter".
wj writes: BTW, does anyone see the irony in a thread titled "General discussion of moderation procedures" containing a statement "A decision has been made. There is nothing more to discuss"... Again, I think such is an example of a needed "summary judgement and action".
wj writes: and having the thread temporarily suspended by a moderator because of a parallel exchange of messages on the thread? Just as standard topics that are deemed "out of control messes" are sometimes given temporary "cooling off period" closures, such did I judge to be the case and need for this topic.
Adminnemooseus, in message 222, writes: I am once again going to close this topic for a while, so that this message doesn't just get buried in the pile. wj writes: It leaves the avenues for members to discuss moderation and running of the board amongst themselves rather limited. Adminnemooseus, in message 222, writes: If you have comments/questions about moderator issues, save them for when the topic reopens. The topic was closed for about 24 hours. Adminnemooseus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
The consensus opinion of the various admin seems to be that you are badly unable to discuss things science. You seem to be a theologian. Stick to the "Faith and Belief" and "Bible Studies" forums, and don't fret about being able to take part in the "Intelligent Design" or "The Bible: Accuracy and Inerrancy" forums.
If you are inclined, I encourage you to propose the "Theology of Intelligent Design (A no science topic)" topic, to go into the "Faith and Belief" forum. Adminnemooseus ps by edit, to Parasomnium:
How is anyone going to learn anything by being restricted from the very place they need to be to learn what they need to learn most urgently? The science forums are available to Buzsaw, read only. This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 05-19-2005 06:09 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
Buzsaw writes: Unfortunately, any kind of science forum in which secularist counterparts cannot control the agenda may be a tough proposition here. Science is secular. Its purpose is neither to confirm nor deny Gods existence. Invoking "God did it" does not apply in science, unless perhaps you can drag God out of the supernatural into the natural. In the "Science Forums" area, the "Intelligent Design" forum is to discuss the scientific merits of ID. Perhaps the "Intelligent Design" forum would better be termed "Intelligent Design - Is It Science?". If you wish to debate the theological merits of ID, independent of scientific consideration, then the topic (as previously suggested) belongs in the "Faith and Belief" forum. Per suggestions of creating other forums: We could have just one forum - "Evolution vs. Creationism". Indeed, that is the "super-forum" designation that covers it all. From there, things have been broken down into sub-forums (eg. "Science Forums"), which in turn have been broken down into the individual ("sub-sub") forums (eg. "Biological Evolution"). The "sub-sub" forums in turn are broken down into other forums, designated "topics". Now, we could always have more "sub-forums", and/or more "sub-sub-forums". We could have a "Theological Considerations of Intelligent Design" forum. Heck, we could even have a "For Buzsaw to say anything he wants to" forum. The trick is to find the best balance between splitting and lumping in the scheme of topic organization. But the default needs to be "lumping", unless it can be determined that there is a good reason for a split. As I see it, "Theological Considerations of Intelligent Design" can nicely fit in the "Faith and Belief" forum. Adminnemooseus (running in the babble mode?)
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024