Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures (aka 'The Whine List')
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2477 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 721 of 1049 (695036)
04-02-2013 3:28 AM
Reply to: Message 712 by Bolder-dash
03-18-2013 8:45 AM


Re: Great debate?
Bolder-dash writes:
bluegenes writes:
You haven't supported your view that hypothetical scenarios involving demonstrably real phenomena (mutations, selection and drift) aren't "plausible" and "realistic".
Would you like a one on one great debate with me on "what is and isn't plausible and realistic in relation to the production of novelty in biology"? We could request non-intervention from moderators, and ask them to restrict any comments to the peanut gallery.
Bluegenes,
Interesting point Bluegenes, that you don't feel that you to provide convincing evidence for your theory, but rather put the onus on the other side to debunk evidence that doesn't even exist.
Read the research papers that I've linked to on your novelty thread, and you'll find plenty of evidence for mutations creating novelty if you understand those papers. Do it.
As you point out, this thread is about moderation. The moderators have been very generous to you on that thread. You've made the bald unsupported claim that evolutionary explanations of novelty are implausible and unrealistic, and the moderators have kindly refrained from asking you to support the claim. It seems that they are bending over backwards to help you, or maybe they are just being patronizing, and have learnt to expect very low standards from you.
Why are you avoiding my offer of a great debate? Shouldn't you be jumping at the chance to demonstrate that supernatural beings making things is more plausible and realistic than demonstrably real processes like mutation and selection making things?
Are you scared? I'll promise to show you some interesting research papers which will help you to develop your views on biology, as these currently seem to be founded on nothing but desire.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 712 by Bolder-dash, posted 03-18-2013 8:45 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


(1)
Message 722 of 1049 (725541)
04-28-2014 9:13 AM


Moose and his over the top suspensions, redux
Moose responds to a science person in a heavy handed manner again. This whole different requirement for standards of behavior for science types versus creos/fundie/idists is still bullshit.
The creos/fundie/idists crowd can sling around insults, continually post meaningless crap and nothing gets said to them. Latest continuing examples are Faith, as always, and ED67, who is particularly abusive.
Did Capt Stormfield deserve a reprimand or slight suspension? Probably. Did it warrant a week? Come on. Moderation must be even handed or it is just random personal attacks.
I know this will never change. Moose will continue to lash out willy-nilly when he feels his sensibilities are insulted, but I needed to comment.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

Replies to this message:
 Message 723 by hooah212002, posted 04-28-2014 9:44 AM Theodoric has not replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 723 of 1049 (725544)
04-28-2014 9:44 AM
Reply to: Message 722 by Theodoric
04-28-2014 9:13 AM


Re: Moose and his over the top suspensions, redux
If the rules were applied evenly, there would be no creationists here. And since this site is useless without them, they have to get special treatment in order to keep them around. Percy said so himself, so don't expect it to change. Yet somehow, they still find a way to complain about unfair treatment.

Organic life is nothing but a genetic mutation, an accident. Your lives are measured in years and decades. You wither and die. We are eternal, the pinnacle of evolution and existence. Before us, you are nothing. Your extinction is inevitable. We are the end of everything.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 722 by Theodoric, posted 04-28-2014 9:13 AM Theodoric has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(3)
Message 724 of 1049 (725640)
04-30-2014 12:00 AM


Capt Stormfield, 1 week - Reduced to 48 hours served.
Thank you, Moose.

Replies to this message:
 Message 726 by Adminnemooseus, posted 04-30-2014 1:26 AM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 725 of 1049 (725645)
04-30-2014 1:05 AM


Suspension?
My advice to Faith was true and (if she took it) useful. She would in fact be benefited immeasurably by listening to me and doing what I suggested. Is altruism a crime now?

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


Message 726 of 1049 (725647)
04-30-2014 1:26 AM
Reply to: Message 724 by AZPaul3
04-30-2014 12:00 AM


Moderation/suspension philosophy
I'm not here going to comment much on the Dr Adequate/Faith affair, other than to say that Dr Adequate might have gotten away with the offending content if he had also included some significant on-topic substance in the message.
I will focus on the Capt Stormfield matter.
Just upthread, Theodoric made a comment for me to build on:
Theodoric writes:
Did Capt Stormfield deserve a reprimand or slight suspension? Probably. Did it warrant a week? Come on. Moderation must be even handed or it is just random personal attacks.
Well, I think that truly even handed moderation MIGHT be possible, it certainly isn't practical. So, yes, there is a certain randomness to my moderation efforts. And while the bad behavior of certain individuals might well build up to influence my actions, this wasn't the case for Capt Stormfield (other than perhaps the other dubious messages of the same day).
If anyone wishes to review the Capt Stormfield output, go to EvC Forum: Search , enter >Capt Stormfield< in the author field and then click search. This will give you a list of his most recent messages (as I type this the ones in question), even multiple messages in the same topic. He posted a bunch of pretty minor messages, including the two that got him suspended.
In the context of all this, I must give special kudos to PaulK and AZPaul3. While others were posting crap and getting suspended, they followed up in the same topics, with quality messages to Faith and to Ed67.
In summary, yes moderation efforts are spotty and random. Sometime, day after day, I see undesirable content messages and don't know what to do about them. Micro-management-moderation just isn't possible/practical. So, somewhere along the line I see something particularly bad, or in general get triggered to make an example of someone. I then hope that others notice and improve there behavior.
Warnings are not effective. They just get lost in the clutter. Suspensions get noticed.
A week may well have been overkill, but I always have the option of shortening it.
Well, probably not a well organized message, but I don't have the time or energy to do better right now.
Adminnemooseus

Or something like that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 724 by AZPaul3, posted 04-30-2014 12:00 AM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 727 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-30-2014 1:38 AM Adminnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(5)
Message 727 of 1049 (725650)
04-30-2014 1:38 AM
Reply to: Message 726 by Adminnemooseus
04-30-2014 1:26 AM


Re: Moderation/suspension philosophy
I'm not here going to comment much on the Dr Adequate/Faith affair, other than to say that Dr Adequate might have gotten away with the offending content if he had also included some significant on-topic substance in the message.
Hey, I wrote an entire book on that particular topic, remember? It was over 100,000 words long. What remains to be done for Faith is to persuade her to study that, or indeed any fucking thing else.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 726 by Adminnemooseus, posted 04-30-2014 1:26 AM Adminnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 728 of 1049 (729776)
06-18-2014 11:59 PM


Re: the flood thread
Message 71
Thank you. Thank you very much.
I'm here all week.
(Try the veal.)
Seriously, nonsense should be confronted where ever it appears. The "global flood" has been disproved for 200 years. Efforts to support it with pseudo-science should not be encouraged except for purposes of amusement.

Replies to this message:
 Message 729 by Adminnemooseus, posted 06-19-2014 12:15 AM Coyote has not replied

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


Message 729 of 1049 (729778)
06-19-2014 12:15 AM
Reply to: Message 728 by Coyote
06-18-2014 11:59 PM


Re: the flood thread
Re: the flood thread
Correction: The "Does oceans of water in mantle rock prove the flood?" thread.
NOT the:
Coyote at message 5 at the "Does oceans of water in mantle rock prove the flood?" topic writes:
What we have instead is evidence of continuity during that time period:
--Continuity of human cultures in all parts of the world
--Continuity of human DNA in all parts of the world, with no break followed by replacement with one narrow DNA strain from the Middle East
--Continuity of stratigraphy, with no evidence of massive flood or erosional deposits
--Continuity of fauna and flora, with no evidence of massive bottlenecks within the last 10,000 or so years.
thread.
Adminnemooseus

Or something like that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 728 by Coyote, posted 06-18-2014 11:59 PM Coyote has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 730 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-19-2014 12:55 AM Adminnemooseus has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 730 of 1049 (729780)
06-19-2014 12:55 AM
Reply to: Message 729 by Adminnemooseus
06-19-2014 12:15 AM


Re: the flood thread
However, post #22 is not off-topic. It directly addresses the question in the title of the thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 729 by Adminnemooseus, posted 06-19-2014 12:15 AM Adminnemooseus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 731 by Adminnemooseus, posted 06-19-2014 1:06 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

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


Message 731 of 1049 (729781)
06-19-2014 1:06 AM
Reply to: Message 730 by Dr Adequate
06-19-2014 12:55 AM


Re: Message 22 at "the flood thread"
Re: Message 22
OOPs - You're absolutely correct. Off-topic banner removed.
Possibly of POTM quality. Certainly a "Post of the Topic" quality.
Adminnemooseus

Or something like that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 730 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-19-2014 12:55 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 732 by Faith, posted 06-19-2014 6:09 AM Adminnemooseus has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 732 of 1049 (729793)
06-19-2014 6:09 AM
Reply to: Message 731 by Adminnemooseus
06-19-2014 1:06 AM


Re: Message 22 at "the flood thread"
Excuse me but I'm going to object that Message 22 was Dr. A's ridiculous mischaracterization of what I said in a post you labeled Off Topic, which in some part it was.
{Message 22 was a reply to message 18 - Adminnemooseus}
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Add link to Faith message.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 731 by Adminnemooseus, posted 06-19-2014 1:06 AM Adminnemooseus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 733 by Adminnemooseus, posted 06-23-2014 3:25 AM Faith has not replied

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


Message 733 of 1049 (730014)
06-23-2014 3:25 AM
Reply to: Message 732 by Faith
06-19-2014 6:09 AM


Re: Faith's message 18 at "the flood thread"
Message 18
I've looked at that message a number of times, including just now, and I'm afraid I just boggled and don't know what to say.
Trying to eliminate the off-topic part, in a concise way what was your essential point in that message? That the water of the flood could have returned to the mantle?
If that is indeed your position (and my previous impression is that it is not), you need to at least propose a mechanism of how the water got down there (but do it at that topic, not here).
Adminnemooseus
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Switch ID's.

Or something like that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 732 by Faith, posted 06-19-2014 6:09 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 734 of 1049 (730320)
06-27-2014 6:08 AM


Moose:
Not terribly interested in whining about your closing that thread on historical versus observational science since the empty responses I've been getting to my recent posts don't bode much in the way of future productivity. \
BUT in your moderator message you are objecting to what seems to you to be too many different topics and my answer to that is the ones I've brought up are meant to be examples of historical versus hard science. If anybody wanted to take the effort seriously we could maybe boil it down to one at a time, but the subject is the scientific method as it applies to many different examples so many different examples seem called for. However, I'm just as happy to leave it closed.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 735 by PaulK, posted 06-27-2014 8:18 AM Faith has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 735 of 1049 (730322)
06-27-2014 8:18 AM
Reply to: Message 734 by Faith
06-27-2014 6:08 AM


Given the low quality of the "comparisons" which seem to be mainly based on the conclusions they are meant to support, it seems that Faith has no case and no interest in honest discussion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 734 by Faith, posted 06-27-2014 6:08 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 736 by Faith, posted 06-27-2014 8:27 AM PaulK 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