Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 58 (9173 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,575 Year: 4,832/9,624 Month: 180/427 Week: 93/85 Day: 0/10 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures (aka 'The Whine List')
cavediver
Member (Idle past 3721 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 601 of 1049 (669347)
07-29-2012 10:35 AM
Reply to: Message 600 by Dr Adequate
07-29-2012 8:11 AM


Re: Hooah
It was AdminPD who suspended him, wasn't it?
Don't think so; PD issued the first instruction, but...
quote:
Hooah212002 suspended for 4 weeks by Adminnemooseus on July 26th.
quote:
4 weeks suspension for being a total jackass in this topic. - Adminnemooseus

Unless I've missed something, hooah should not have been suspended at all, let alone for a month.
Quite

This message is a reply to:
 Message 600 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-29-2012 8:11 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
CosmicChimp
Member
Posts: 311
From: Muenchen Bayern Deutschland
Joined: 06-15-2007


Message 602 of 1049 (669379)
07-29-2012 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 597 by cavediver
07-29-2012 6:44 AM


Re: Hooah
I'm more than happy reading your posts replying to any physics questions. But, here is the Susskind paper for those of us who have not noticed it yet.
But much like my feelings concerning Hooah's suspension, I sure would like to know if Susskind has really bested Hawking in "The Black Hole Wars".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 597 by cavediver, posted 07-29-2012 6:44 AM cavediver has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 603 of 1049 (669794)
08-02-2012 11:45 PM


Moose Announces
People, I'm seeing a fair number of messages that pile up a bunch of (+) ratings. Would someone please start plugging some of these into the POTM topics. - Adminnemooseus
That ain't gonna work. If you weren't such a dick people might take your advice. Just sayin'

Replies to this message:
 Message 604 by Adminnemooseus, posted 08-03-2012 2:07 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

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


(1)
Message 604 of 1049 (669799)
08-03-2012 2:07 AM
Reply to: Message 603 by New Cat's Eye
08-02-2012 11:45 PM


Re: Moose Announces
Oh darn, I should have created that announcement anonymously. Now people aren't going to post to the POTM topics because I suggested it. Might as well shut the POTM forum down.
Adminnemooseus

Or something like that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 603 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-02-2012 11:45 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 605 by New Cat's Eye, posted 08-03-2012 10:15 AM Adminnemooseus has not replied
 Message 606 by onifre, posted 08-04-2012 8:16 PM Adminnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 605 of 1049 (669822)
08-03-2012 10:15 AM
Reply to: Message 604 by Adminnemooseus
08-03-2012 2:07 AM


Re: Moose Announces
Oh darn, I should have created that announcement anonymously. Now people aren't going to post to the POTM topics because I suggested it. Might as well shut the POTM forum down.
No, that's dumb. People are still gonna post POTM's, its just not gonna be because of your announcement.
You can't be mean to a group of people and then turn around and ask them to do something. That don't work.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 604 by Adminnemooseus, posted 08-03-2012 2:07 AM Adminnemooseus has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 3028 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


(3)
Message 606 of 1049 (669879)
08-04-2012 8:16 PM
Reply to: Message 604 by Adminnemooseus
08-03-2012 2:07 AM


Re: Moose Announces
Yo are you going to address the questions pertaining to your unreasonable and ridiculous suspension of Hoooah for 4 weeks that we've asked? Why start this thread if you're going to ignore the questions?
If you give us a good reply I'll submit it as a POTM so you can get a baby boner.
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 604 by Adminnemooseus, posted 08-03-2012 2:07 AM Adminnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 607 of 1049 (669885)
08-05-2012 6:59 AM


Why Is Buz Still Banned From Sience And Biblical Threads?
Interesting it is that EvC's only ardent lifetime daily student of the Bible is still banned, after months of banning from the most pertinent Biblical threads such as Jar's prophecy thread, falsely claming that no Jesus prophecies have ever been fulfilled. Fulfilled prophecy has always been my fort'e in my Biblical studies.
Admin has posted that in order for me to get re-instated in the Science forum I must do a thread on the nature of evidence. This I have done. So why am I still banned from Science??

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
Someone wisely said something ;ike, "Before fooling with a fool, make sure the fool is a fool."

Replies to this message:
 Message 608 by Panda, posted 08-05-2012 7:47 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 609 by Admin, posted 08-05-2012 8:23 AM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 610 by NoNukes, posted 08-05-2012 11:54 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3790 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 608 of 1049 (669886)
08-05-2012 7:47 AM
Reply to: Message 607 by Buzsaw
08-05-2012 6:59 AM


Re: Why Is Buz Still Banned From Sience And Biblical Threads?
Buzsaw writes:
Admin has posted that in order for me to get re-instated in the Science forum I must do a thread on the nature of evidence. This I have done. So why am I still banned from Science??
Because you have selective memory about what Admin actually said.
Admin writes:
If you'd truly like to return to the science forums then why don't you propose a thread to discuss the nature of valid evidence. If you can reach a consensus with other people about evidence then you can return to the science forums.
(bolding mine)

"There is no great invention, from fire to flying, which has not been hailed as an insult to some god." J. B. S. Haldane

This message is a reply to:
 Message 607 by Buzsaw, posted 08-05-2012 6:59 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 13081
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.4


(1)
Message 609 of 1049 (669888)
08-05-2012 8:23 AM
Reply to: Message 607 by Buzsaw
08-05-2012 6:59 AM


Re: Why Is Buz Still Banned From Sience And Biblical Threads?
Buzsaw writes:
Admin has posted that in order for me to get re-instated in the Science forum I must do a thread on the nature of evidence. This I have done.
What on Earth gave you that idea? Your thread is still in Proposed New Topics: The Nature Of Evidence
You proposed your thread at 8 PM one evening, and Adminnemooseus promoted it 11 minutes later. Since the requirement came from me it would have been preferable if I had had a chance to review it first. The thread quickly descended into babel and I returned it to Proposed New Topics the next day.
The goal is for you to reach sufficient consensus with other members about the nature of scientific evidence that your participation in threads no longer causes them to descend into a back-and-forth of claims from you that you've submitted evidence and counter-claims from everyone else claiming you haven't.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 607 by Buzsaw, posted 08-05-2012 6:59 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 613 by Buzsaw, posted 08-05-2012 8:52 PM Admin has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(3)
Message 610 of 1049 (669893)
08-05-2012 11:54 AM
Reply to: Message 607 by Buzsaw
08-05-2012 6:59 AM


It's pretty clear why.
Admin has posted that in order for me to get re-instated in the Science forum I must do a thread on the nature of evidence. This I have done. So why am I still banned from Science??
Seriously Buz,
You thought the only requirement was to start a thread and it took you over a year to get round to it? Fascinating.
Perhaps you have forgotten something about admin's direction. In order to rejoin the science forums you are going to have to actually accept some instruction about what the nature of evidence, and you are going to have to use the discussion to inform your future participation so that every thread does not turn into a ridiculing of your thought processes.
Otherwise you are just going to be re-banned in short order.
I don't believe you to be capable of obtaining reinstatement under those conditions. Your current diatribe regarding evidence reflects the same lack of understanding that got you booted.
The jeer button is the one on the right.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison

This message is a reply to:
 Message 607 by Buzsaw, posted 08-05-2012 6:59 AM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 611 by Jon, posted 08-05-2012 1:17 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 611 of 1049 (669894)
08-05-2012 1:17 PM
Reply to: Message 610 by NoNukes
08-05-2012 11:54 AM


Re: It's pretty clear why.
The jeer button is the one on the right.
Thanks. I would have otherwise missed it.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 610 by NoNukes, posted 08-05-2012 11:54 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1421 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 612 of 1049 (669910)
08-05-2012 7:35 PM


from Message 412 of "creationist shortage" thread:
Tangle writes:
It's a curious stand off which doesn't seem to have an easy solution. I have in the past suggested that the owners of EVC and EFT get together to allow a jointly moderated fora so that equal teams, playing to the same rules can meetand fight. Unless a move like that can be made, I suspect both fora will dwindle and eventually die for lack of oppositional debate.
{This same idea was suggested in some other thread recently. I've mentioned this possibility several times over there, never got even a nibble of interest. I wonder if any of their moderators would be interested in becoming moderators over here. --Admin}
{Probably Tangle's Home and Away Games - Adminnemooseus}
i don't know if it really goes here, or even in that thread (which is in summation mode anyways), but... if you ever think our moderation is bad, try there.
i couldn't even make in the front door. the moderator has to approve every member, and some topics/arguments are cause for a ban. namely, any argument that would try to disprove the moderator's opinion. not a christian? can't comment on bible threads. new, unapproved member? can't even look at or edit your own profile. or search.
i'd love to see a jointly-moderated forum, with more creationist input. but that guy's only interested in a personal preaching platform.
at least here, we can have threads like this to argue about moderation and whether or not it's fair. it's the thing i've always liked about this site; transparency and discussion over authoritarian bans without warning or argument.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Topic link in red.

אָרַח

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 613 of 1049 (669911)
08-05-2012 8:52 PM
Reply to: Message 609 by Admin
08-05-2012 8:23 AM


Re: Why Is Buz Still Banned From Sience And Biblical Threads?
Admin writes:
The goal is for you to reach sufficient consensus with other members about the nature of scientific evidence that your participation in threads no longer causes them to descend into a back-and-forth of claims from you that you've submitted evidence and counter-claims from everyone else claiming you haven't.
Buzsaw writes:
Admin has posted that in order for me to get re-instated in the Science forum I must do a thread on the nature of evidence. This I have done.
What on Earth gave you that idea? Your thread is still in Proposed New Topics: The Nature Of Evidence
You proposed your thread at 8 PM one evening, and Adminnemooseus promoted it 11 minutes later. Since the requirement came from me it would have been preferable if I had had a chance to review it first. The thread quickly descended into babel and I returned it to Proposed New Topics the next day.
The goal is for you to reach sufficient consensus with other members about the nature of scientific evidence that your participation in threads no longer causes them to descend into a back-and-forth of claims from you that you've submitted evidence and counter-claims from everyone else claiming you haven't.
So I, the only ongoing EvC creationist, must agree with my debate counterparts about evidence, who most always take the opposite stance on evidence as Biblical creationists? Why must we agree with our secularist counterparts on evidence? Don't you think that is too much for you ask of me, when narry a one of you has ever addmitted to even one of my scorees of posted evidences in the threads?
This is the kind of stuff that keeps creationists away for your cite. Most brouse the cite before deciding whether to come. All they need do is log in and see how you treat the few of us that remain. The say, "not more me" and move on.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
Someone wisely said something ;ike, "Before fooling with a fool, make sure the fool is a fool."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 609 by Admin, posted 08-05-2012 8:23 AM Admin has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 614 by crashfrog, posted 08-05-2012 9:09 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1544 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 614 of 1049 (669912)
08-05-2012 9:09 PM
Reply to: Message 613 by Buzsaw
08-05-2012 8:52 PM


Re: Why Is Buz Still Banned From Sience And Biblical Threads?
Why must we agree with our secularist counterparts on evidence?
For the same reason you have to agree with your counterparts on the English language. There has to be some basis of shared agreement for discussion to take place. If words mean one thing when I say them, but something else completely when you do, how can discussion take place between us?
For that matter, Buz, how do you expect to convince anybody who asks for evidence, if you can't either present the kind of evidence they're asking for, or convince them to accept a different kind of evidence? I appreciate your perspective - that you're talking to people who have a radically different notion of what "evidence" means - because the exact same thing is true from our perspective. If you're interested in participating in the debate then you're going to have to arrive at some consensus with us about what "evidence" means. I appreciate that it's an uphill battle for you, but you'll just have to be at your most convincing.
Here's the thing, though. I don't think you'll find it as impossible as you may suspect. A great deal of us would like the opportunity to show you that even according your own construction of the term "evidence", you've yet to present any that corroborates the Biblical record. In order to do so, I suspect you'll find that many of us are prepared to be quite conciliatory about what constitutes evidence in the context of a "Buzsaw" thread, just for purposes of discussion. But you have to make some effort to meet us there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 613 by Buzsaw, posted 08-05-2012 8:52 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 615 of 1049 (669915)
08-05-2012 9:45 PM


Moving On
The reason remains that I'm not allowed in science, that I kick too much evo butt in them. Admin always sees to it that any effective threat to his own must be run off, no matter what it takes.
There's enough for me in the non-science threads for the limited time I have to debate here. I gave it a shot, but as usual, no soap. Enough on this matter. I'm top busy too waste my time here.
Edited by Buzsaw, : spelling

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
Someone wisely said something ;ike, "Before fooling with a fool, make sure the fool is a fool."

Replies to this message:
 Message 616 by PaulK, posted 08-06-2012 1:31 AM Buzsaw has seen this message but not replied
 Message 617 by Tangle, posted 08-06-2012 3:29 AM Buzsaw has seen this message but not replied
 Message 618 by purpledawn, posted 08-06-2012 7:15 AM Buzsaw has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024