Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Line of skulls
helena 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5845 days)
Posts: 80
Joined: 03-27-2008


Message 1 of 10 (69416)
11-26-2003 12:18 PM


As a regular lurker but not so regular poster, I have noted that the line of skulls (evolution from "ape" to homo-sapiens) keeps being posted on various threads by various posters.
I am the first to admit that it is a very valuable demonstration about the completeness of the fossil record but I would appreciate if it was not posted over and over again.
Therefore, why not include it somewhere on the site? Like the reference library or someplace similar...
my best regards

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by NosyNed, posted 11-26-2003 1:24 PM helena has replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 2 of 10 (69425)
11-26-2003 1:24 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by helena
11-26-2003 12:18 PM


Why is it a problem if it is posted in places where it seems to be relavent?
The idea of expanding the reference library is nice but then we would find that almost all the real creation vs evolution arguments would already be there. When a new drive by poster came along with the "why are there monkeys" or "the flood did it" type of argument everyone would just point there. It would turn this into more of a library than a debate forum.
It isn't as efficient this way but it is a bit more fun. Doncha think?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by helena, posted 11-26-2003 12:18 PM helena has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Rei, posted 11-26-2003 1:38 PM NosyNed has not replied
 Message 4 by helena, posted 11-26-2003 2:51 PM NosyNed has replied

  
Rei
Member (Idle past 7013 days)
Posts: 1546
From: Iowa City, IA
Joined: 09-03-2003


Message 3 of 10 (69426)
11-26-2003 1:38 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by NosyNed
11-26-2003 1:24 PM


I agree, Ned.
------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by NosyNed, posted 11-26-2003 1:24 PM NosyNed has not replied

  
helena 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5845 days)
Posts: 80
Joined: 03-27-2008


Message 4 of 10 (69430)
11-26-2003 2:51 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by NosyNed
11-26-2003 1:24 PM


quote:
Why is it a problem if it is posted in places where it seems to be relavent?
It's not a problem as such. I just thought that it might be nice to have a place where such relevant information is collected. Sooner or later the threads will vanish under a lot of postings and people new to this site will not be able to sort through all those discussions...
I just wondered, if there could be a way to keep the more interesting postings / pictures / links whatever collected for later reference or for the introduction of newbies to the debate.
quote:
It would turn this into more of a library than a debate forum.
Not a hundred percent sure about this. (a) Many (or indeed most) of the "the flood diddit" posters don't bother to read up anyways, and (b) maybe some more interesting / involved discussions would start to happen. I mean there's plenty of forums where you get flamed for bringing up an old topic and still there is new discussion happening (This is by no means to say that I endorse that kind of flaming / behaviour; in particular I like the idea of "resurrecting" long dead threads when they seem relevant again)
regards

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by NosyNed, posted 11-26-2003 1:24 PM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by NosyNed, posted 11-26-2003 3:10 PM helena has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 5 of 10 (69431)
11-26-2003 3:10 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by helena
11-26-2003 2:51 PM


Yes.
While I don't want to loose the debate aspect, I would like to see things collected more carefully. "Post-of-the-Month" helps a little but it's too haphazard.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by helena, posted 11-26-2003 2:51 PM helena has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Adminnemooseus, posted 11-26-2003 5:39 PM NosyNed has replied

  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 6 of 10 (69437)
11-26-2003 5:39 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by NosyNed
11-26-2003 3:10 PM


Number of messages per (?) limit
It used to be that things were slow enough around here, that there was room for considerably less than profound postings. As I see it, that time is past.
At the beginning of the year, a day with 120 new messages would be considered a heavy posting day. Now days that would be a light day. Most recently, less than 200 new messages seems like a light day, and we have been running a few 300+ new message days.
I've made my attempts to slow people down - It just doesn't work.
What if the software put a limit on messages a day, messages a week, etc. for individuals? Then people might have to give greater consideration to what the significance of their potential message is.
If so, my WAG (wild ass guess) would be, say, 5 messages a day, and 50(?) messages per month. Although, the creationist side have a heavier load on them, and might need higher numbers per whatever.
Adminnemooseus

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by NosyNed, posted 11-26-2003 3:10 PM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by NosyNed, posted 11-26-2003 5:43 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied
 Message 8 by Dr Jack, posted 11-27-2003 6:49 AM Adminnemooseus has not replied
 Message 9 by Buzsaw, posted 11-29-2003 5:38 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 7 of 10 (69440)
11-26-2003 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Adminnemooseus
11-26-2003 5:39 PM


Re: Number of messages per (?) limit
But are the messages per moderately active poster going up or is it number of posters that are driving the message counts? If you have some idea of a cap on daily messages and we keep getting more posters then eventually we'll only be able to post once every day or so.
Is the number of postings a problem or the volume of post material? A huge, long, disjointed, post is worse than 5 short to-the-point posts. Could the volume limit be on number of characters rather than number of posts?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Adminnemooseus, posted 11-26-2003 5:39 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied

  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 8 of 10 (69559)
11-27-2003 6:49 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Adminnemooseus
11-26-2003 5:39 PM


Re: Number of messages per (?) limit
Might I suggest that it would be better to limit the rate of posting to threads, rather than the number of posts. If people could only post once to a thread every three (say) hours, it would stop thread running into the distance.
The trouble is however you do it, you're encouraging people to merge their posts into one big post, rather than answering particular points in the wonderful 'reply to' structure that is so good about this board in particular.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Adminnemooseus, posted 11-26-2003 5:39 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 10 (69908)
11-29-2003 5:38 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Adminnemooseus
11-26-2003 5:39 PM


Re: Number of messages per (?) limit
quote:
Although, the creationist side have a heavier load on them, and might need higher numbers per whatever.
Yah, like when a creo posts anything there's often a chorus of three or four evos to second about anything posted by a fellow evo, no matter how substantial the data. Ned's one of those who seems to think he has to get in there and lend support to about anything one of his own puts out. Maybe you need to slow down a tad, I say, a tad, some who seem to have nothing to do 24/7 but post on EvO rather than an across the board limit.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Adminnemooseus, posted 11-26-2003 5:39 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Brian, posted 11-29-2003 6:01 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 10 of 10 (69913)
11-29-2003 6:01 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Buzsaw
11-29-2003 5:38 PM


Re: Number of messages per (?) limit
Maybe it would be easier if members stopped posting pointless messages. I think a small witty comment here and there is fine , but a small post that actually contributes nothing to a discussion needs to be cut out.
Look at your post in 'Is The Fossil Record a indication of Evolution?'
Buzz post #6 Imo, there ought to be millions, if not billions of transitionals -- so many that it would be without question.
Rocky #7 Alright Buz, I give up - why should there be billions of transitionals?
Buzz post #8 Because it would take uncountable billions of transitionals to evolve everything from slime to sublime.
IMO post #6 was pointless and rocky had to use up another post to find out what you are on about, you then repsonded with another inadequate post, which will also require another post from Rocky to clarify.
Wouldn't it be more useful and profitable for you to have included in post #6 details of why you think there ought to be million or billions of transitionals?
I am not singling you out Buz coz I do things like this too.
It does appear to me that many posts here are absolutely pointless and the member should really make sure that what they post is adequate. I personally will try harder to achieve this.
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Buzsaw, posted 11-29-2003 5:38 PM Buzsaw has 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