Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 58 (9173 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,567 Year: 4,824/9,624 Month: 172/427 Week: 85/85 Day: 2/20 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consequtive Consecution Sequel
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1481 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 211 of 302 (309490)
05-05-2006 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 208 by Admin
05-05-2006 8:22 AM


Re: Age Correlations Step by Step
If you're going into this with eyes open, and in particular if you have some discussion style/approach ideas you'd like to try out for bringing a problem poster closer to constructive discussion, then I lean toward being encouraging.
My biggest problem I see is that the thread started just to review age dating with 'relative'/simple is at 73 posts and counting, and very little of it has to do with the bristlecone pine data because 'relative'/simple is off and running on one of his pet illusions.
While a {great debate} format would not prevent him from introducing plethoras of imaginary scenarios, it would limit the divergence from the topic at hand as other posters take on those fantasies.
My original idea was to proceed similar to the grand canyon thread by jar (that I have yet to finish, as enjoyable as it is), though not necessarily in a strict linear fashion.

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by Admin, posted 05-05-2006 8:22 AM Admin has not replied

DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2293
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 212 of 302 (309579)
05-06-2006 2:25 AM
Reply to: Message 208 by Admin
05-05-2006 8:22 AM


Simple/relative
We're pretty sure it's Simple
If it is simple (which i don't doubt) and he has bypassed his suspension by creating a new ID then isn't another suspension in order based on this act alone? I'm sure this is an issue you mods have been discussing amongst yourselves but I had to ask.
This message has been edited by DrJones*, 05-06-2006 12:28 AM

Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by Admin, posted 05-05-2006 8:22 AM Admin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by Adminnemooseus, posted 05-06-2006 1:55 PM DrJones* has not replied

Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3977
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 213 of 302 (309694)
05-06-2006 1:55 PM
Reply to: Message 212 by DrJones*
05-06-2006 2:25 AM


Re: Simple/relative
I, at least for now, would prefer to not discuss the details of this situation, other than in the "Private Administration Forum". I suspect the other admins feel the same.
Right now, the membership should be aware that to debate with Simple/Relative is to debate with someone who has a substantial history of being a forum problem. If you now find Simple/Relative to be a problem, then just don't get involved with debating him.
Or something like that.
Adminnemooseus

This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by DrJones*, posted 05-06-2006 2:25 AM DrJones* has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 214 by RAZD, posted 05-06-2006 2:57 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1481 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 214 of 302 (309723)
05-06-2006 2:57 PM
Reply to: Message 213 by Adminnemooseus
05-06-2006 1:55 PM


Re: Simple/relative
It's not just relative. As you hint, if no one answered him there would be no problem ... it's more like:
diversion off topic = k*(evos*creos)*{number of responses}2
... where k is a constant dependant on the number of Dryas octopetala blooms at any time you chose.

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 213 by Adminnemooseus, posted 05-06-2006 1:55 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied

Belfry
Member (Idle past 5162 days)
Posts: 177
From: Ocala, FL
Joined: 11-05-2005


Message 215 of 302 (309754)
05-06-2006 4:21 PM


No need to rub it in.
I totally understand being chided about an off-topic post (re: Evolution Simplified: Message 38), and I acknowledge and apologize for that.
However, I felt unecessarily singled out by Adminmooseus' wording of "OFF TOPIC. WAY OFF TOPIC. WAY, WAY OFF TOPIC," in the moderator comment. I was, after all, only responding to an ongoing off-topic subthread of posts (11 posts before mine) - none of which received any warning whatsoever.
Not a big deal, I'm just saying Moose could have just stuck with the standard "OFF TOPIC, DO NOT RESPOND," under the circumstances. Figured I'd bring my comment to the appropriate board.

Replies to this message:
 Message 216 by Chiroptera, posted 05-06-2006 4:35 PM Belfry has replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 216 of 302 (309763)
05-06-2006 4:35 PM
Reply to: Message 215 by Belfry
05-06-2006 4:21 PM


Re: No need to rub it in.
Although I usually find Moose's comments more acerbic than necessary, I don't feel that it is the case here. It appears to me to be an injection of humor, and not necessarily in way meant to be demeaning or insulting. At least, that is how I read it.
And as far as feeling picked on, you seem to just have had the bad luck of being the last one to post when Moose noticed this particular subthread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by Belfry, posted 05-06-2006 4:21 PM Belfry has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 217 by Belfry, posted 05-06-2006 4:48 PM Chiroptera has replied

Belfry
Member (Idle past 5162 days)
Posts: 177
From: Ocala, FL
Joined: 11-05-2005


Message 217 of 302 (309767)
05-06-2006 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 216 by Chiroptera
05-06-2006 4:35 PM


Re: No need to rub it in.
Chiroptera writes:
And as far as feeling picked on, you seem to just have had the bad luck of being the last one to post when Moose noticed this particular subthread.
Fair enough. I'm probably being overly sensitive. I had been resisting the terrible urge to respond to the initial off-topic post on the topic, expecting to see an admin message show up on it, and then other people (some of whom have Alter Egos with super powers) kept responding to it... so I gave in to my urge, and paid the price.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 216 by Chiroptera, posted 05-06-2006 4:35 PM Chiroptera has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 218 by Chiroptera, posted 05-06-2006 4:52 PM Belfry has not replied
 Message 219 by BMG, posted 05-06-2006 5:48 PM Belfry has replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 218 of 302 (309769)
05-06-2006 4:52 PM
Reply to: Message 217 by Belfry
05-06-2006 4:48 PM


Re: No need to rub it in.
By the way, I do know how you feel. There have been several instances where I just happened to be the last one to respond to an off-topic and so had the "Do not respond" warning attached to my post. It seems natural enough to wonder why it was my post that finally earned the warning.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by Belfry, posted 05-06-2006 4:48 PM Belfry has not replied

BMG
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 357
From: Southwestern U.S.
Joined: 03-16-2006


Message 219 of 302 (309774)
05-06-2006 5:48 PM
Reply to: Message 217 by Belfry
05-06-2006 4:48 PM


My fault
Belfry writes:
I had been resisting the terrible urge to respond to the initial off-topic post on the topic, expecting to see an admin message show up on it, and then other people...kept responding to it...so I gave in to my urge, and paid the price.
Hi Belfry.
That's my fault, obviously. I seem to be unable to put together a coherent post. The point I was trying to make was that I was, previously, debating with my brother on the credibility of evolution. I noted, to my brother, that evolution is usually a gradual process that takes millions upon millions of years, and the fossil record is strong support of this.
He responded that dating techniques were flawed and unreliable; that the fossils which were claimed to be millions of years old was a farce; that the earth couldn't be 4.6 or so billion years old. He used the hydrogen rebuttal as support for his assertion. I was merely asking whether anyone had previously heard of this claim before.
Whether my post was on/off topic I didn't know, hence the reason for my asking the question "Is this post even on topic".
Again, I apologize for my inability to provide a clear and coherent post, and for being the catalyst of your indignation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by Belfry, posted 05-06-2006 4:48 PM Belfry has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by Belfry, posted 05-06-2006 6:31 PM BMG has not replied

Belfry
Member (Idle past 5162 days)
Posts: 177
From: Ocala, FL
Joined: 11-05-2005


Message 220 of 302 (309798)
05-06-2006 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 219 by BMG
05-06-2006 5:48 PM


Re: My fault
LOL, definitely not your fault, Infixion. You see, I knew it was off-topic, and I responded anyway. And then I let an innocuous admin remark get to me (to my current chagrin - if I'd waited a few minutes, I would have let it pass with a rueful grin).
Personally, I wouldn't mind if there was enough flexibility in the On-Topic guidelines to allow a side issue like the one you raised, particularly in a thread with a topic title as broad as "evolution simplified." But, given the way things tend to snowball in EvC debates, the reticence of the admins to allow it is warranted. Shouting matches are rarely seen here, in comparison to other boards I frequent.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 219 by BMG, posted 05-06-2006 5:48 PM BMG has not replied

Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3977
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 221 of 302 (311082)
05-11-2006 4:39 PM


brianforbes IS NOT another incarnation of simple
There has been some discussion (here and up thread) that member brianforbes is another incarnation of member simple. After investigations by our crack "tracking simple" staff, it has been concluded that there is stong evidence to support that such is not the case.
Despite whatever posting style simularities that may exist, the conclusion is that brianforbes IS NOT simple.
This message should conclude any discussion of that matter.
Adminnemooseus

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 222 of 302 (311317)
05-12-2006 12:39 AM


You want to go ahead and promote that thread by Faith about faith? Some are interested.

JavaMan
Member (Idle past 2395 days)
Posts: 475
From: York, England
Joined: 08-05-2005


Message 223 of 302 (312336)
05-16-2006 7:21 AM


robinrohan's complaint proposal
Can we have robinrohan's proposal to discuss in the Coffee House? He's a long-running, active member - shouldn't we listen to his complaint?

The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible

Replies to this message:
 Message 224 by AdminNWR, posted 05-16-2006 9:53 AM JavaMan has not replied

AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 224 of 302 (312379)
05-16-2006 9:53 AM
Reply to: Message 223 by JavaMan
05-16-2006 7:21 AM


Re: robinrohan's complaint proposal
Can we have robinrohan's proposal to discuss in the Coffee House?
Promoted. See The problem with EVC.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by JavaMan, posted 05-16-2006 7:21 AM JavaMan has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 225 by robinrohan, posted 05-20-2006 12:55 PM AdminNWR has not replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 225 of 302 (313898)
05-20-2006 12:55 PM
Reply to: Message 224 by AdminNWR
05-16-2006 9:53 AM


Re: robinrohan's complaint proposal
Those who have the courage to argue about things they know little about must accept that uninformed ideas will be given short shrift
What is it that I know little about?
Edited by AdminJar, : off topic for the thread

This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by AdminNWR, posted 05-16-2006 9:53 AM AdminNWR has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 226 by AdminJar, posted 05-20-2006 12:58 PM robinrohan has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024