|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures (aka 'The Whine List') | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2477 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9076 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.7
|
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 801 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Capt Stormfield, 1 week - Reduced to 48 hours served. Thank you, Moose.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
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: |
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. AdminnemooseusOr something like that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2106 days) Posts: 6117 Joined:
|
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3974 Joined: |
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. AdminnemooseusOr something like that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
However, post #22 is not off-topic. It directly addresses the question in the title of the thread.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3974 Joined: |
Re: Message 22
OOPs - You're absolutely correct. Off-topic banner removed. Possibly of POTM quality. Certainly a "Post of the Topic" quality. AdminnemooseusOr something like that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3974 Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
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.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024