Report discussion problems here: No.2

Why did you not include the post I was RESPONDING to?Why did you also not include Dr.A's meaningless one line insults and Huntards post to me which were completely unprovoked?Furthermore, when Percy decides to do his own complaining on that thread instead of doing it here, I am not entitled to respond? How many posts did he post that were off topic?Now you are the moderator as well? Or you mean it is only off topic when I mentioned the other posters were off topic? If you say this, or Percy say this, then its on topic?

Percy owns the forum. Literally. He is Admin, whether he's posting on that account or not. If you don't like his moderation, this likely isn't a good place for you.Cue admins telling everyone to stop discussing in a non-discussion thread in 3...2...1...

If Percy is the God in every thread on every topic, then if you disagree with him, then what? Then he is always right?That's called moderation? I think the proper name for that is a Kangaroo Court?

No. He doesn't ban people for disagreeing with him. He bans people for being off-topic (which you once again are here, as am I for replying to you, but meh) or not following the guidelines. Which is why he doesn't act that way. Nor did Rahvin say he did.

---

I hunt for the truthI am the one Orgasmatron, the outstretched grasping hand
My image is of agony, my servants rape the land
Obsequious and arrogant, clandestine and vain
Two thousand years of misery, of torture in my name
Hypocrisy made paramount, paranoia the law
My name is called religion, sadistic, sacred whore.
-Lyrics by Lemmy Kilmister of Motorhead

So I am willing to accept being banned, in fact I will do it voluntarily, if he also bans you, and Son and Wounded King and himself as well-because what you are claiming I did is the exact same thing all of you did-the only difference being that mine were simply replies to comments, whereas all of yours were unprovoked intrusions.And I thought that was the whole reason for coming to this thread-to report unfair treatment as opposed to continuing it in the original thread. Edited by Bolder-dash, : Kangaroo Court

Please let the moderators deal with moderation issues.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

In response to your Message 149: Cautioning someone for violating the Forum Guidelines does not always bring about the desired improvement, so moderators deal with each issue on a case by case basis. You might recall your own reaction the one time I admonished you. This is why I chose to close thread The difference between a human and a rock yesterday instead of admonishing you directly after your appalling Message 51.Edited by Admin, : Grammar.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Yes, I do recall that, and that is exactly what I am talking about. My post was a reply to his and ten other posts which were exactly that, more ad hominem attacks towards me, which I never did to them. He basically was calling me an asshole. I NEVER make ad hominem attacks towards posters-I do however respond to them if the moderator refuses to do their part and prevent them. I realize you have a busy job and can't prevent everything, but in my opinion the guy orignating this type of discussion is much more at fault than a guy responding to them.It is after all pretty hard to continue any type of reasonable discussion when you are repeatedly getting interrupted by this crap. Cavediver has been doing it, Dr. A does it as a matter of course, and I have been victim to this from at least ten other parties. I don't believe I have ONCE seen you admonish this.Once again you have done it here with Vivpope, reprimanding him, instead of reprimanding the attackers.

I'm know you believe this, but you might consider the possibility that your messages are more aggressive and antagonistic than you think. Because I think you would strongly reject that possibility I have avoided raising it.When other posters are being idiots, don't make it impossible for moderators to sort things out by joining them.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Well, I won't force you into spending too much time on this, but I will agree that I may respond aggressively, but that is quite a different thing from initiating something. Why not reprimand the instigator instead of the responder, wouldn't that be more productive. When someone is allowed to make these kind of digs over and over again, with no one attempting to curtail them-the problem doesn't seem to me to be the person who eventually responds. I have responded to an average of one in ten of them. I shouldn't have to.And BTW, I wouldn't even bother responding at all if this were a typical moronic internet forum, where this is normal behavior and to be expected-but this site IS in fact better than that for the most part. Edited by Bolder-dash, : No reason given.

In Message 173 He continues to spam his website. This time though, using a bit more chicanery.He says to google "Neo-Machian Normal Realism"...and what do you know, the first link is one to his website.2nd, he says to google "quantum touching" which is no more than his theory. A google search leads to some touch theraoy....and guess what! ......his website.Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.Edited by hooah212002, : re-added second mention

---

Who are we? We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people
-Carl Sagan

Mostly Smooth Operator and Huntard, but also others to a lesser extent, are in one-liner mode in What exactly is ID?. For examples see Message 135, Message 145, Message 147, Message 148, Message 149, Message 156, Message 158, Message 160, Message 161 and Message 163.--Percy

Thanks for bringing this up Percy. When I saw SO's latest reply to my post I was livid.I would also appreciate it if someone could mention to SO that if he doesn't care for the tone of the messages he's reading he should feel free to seek other fora, not tell others to leave.

In the What exactly is ID? thread, Smooth Operator's behavior sort of leaves others no option but to beg him to actually participate in discussion. In Message 296 I said this: And in response in Message 314 Smooth Operator says this: I don't really think Smooth Operator can be coaxed into a more collegial form of participation, but if any moderators get a bolt of insight then please give it a try.--Percy

Based on just Message 323 over at What exactly is ID? it appears that Smooth Operator is due for a time out. That's not argument. That's just insult.(Is it kosher for non-participants to note problems?)