|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,927 Year: 4,184/9,624 Month: 1,055/974 Week: 14/368 Day: 14/11 Hour: 2/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures (aka 'The Whine List') | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
I may well have more to say on other aspects, but right now I felt I must comment on this:
Right, its no surprise that she get's the responses that she does when she behaves the way she does. It doesn't surprise me that Faith sometimes gets cranky. Imagine yourself (as in any of the evo side) being in a debate in a creationist dominated forum, and you are the one against the many. Even if "the many" go about it nicely (and here, the evo side sometimes does come up short on that), there is a substantial pressure on you, and you'd be liable to get cranky. One side of the argument being cranky doesn't justify the other side getting cranky. I don't care who started it, you should be nice to your opponent. If you can't be such, maybe you shouldn't be posting that reply. On a side note, one thing I could try doing, is a hard core enforcement of the forum rules. So, look at your messages and see if you find forum rule violation(s). Ideally, there should be none. I think the gold standard is how Percy responds. Maybe we should have a WWPD operational philosophy. "Insert signature here" AdminnemooseusOr something like that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
I off-topic bannered a message at the "Earth science curriculum tailored to fit wavering fundamentalists" topic, and suggested an alternate topic for the material.
I've come to wonder if some of the other subsequent messages there a also off-topic. It strikes me, that the nature of the topic precludes creationist input. Any creationist sided input would be inherently off-topic. Comments? AdminnemooseusOr something like that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
I thinking specifically of Evidence that the Great Unconformity did not Form Before the Strata above it, but there is at least one other.
At the cited topic, there are currently 1739 messages, of which 174 are from Admin. He is third on the post number list. While Admin's effort is impressive, my impression is that he is more doing debate under the Admin ID, than just moderating. Looking at the bulk of the Admin messages content, would they have seemed improper had they come from the Percy ID, or another non-admin member? On the flip side, in the more distant past, I've also sometimes noticed admins moderating via their non-admin ID's. Comments? AdminnemooseusOr something like that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined:
|
From Suspensions and Bannings Part III, Message 221:
The "little red dot" suspension message:
Her first topic was spammish but relevant to this forums interests. Now there is a second similar topic. And now she has a banner graphic signature, promoting and linking to the second topics video. Things are just getting too spammy. 24 hr suspension - Time for the various admins to evaluate these topics legitimacy (OSLT) - Adminnemooseus Adminnemooseus Added by edit: I've now zapped all those spammy signatures, and the shut signature off. Any discussion of this suspension and other actions should to to General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures (aka 'The Whine List'). The first sentence of her first message:
I could have permanently suspended her and exiled the topic to the hidden "Spam Topics" forum right at that point. But I thought "Even though the topic is spammy, it is a subject related to the interests of this forum". Perhaps I should have put that comment into the approval message, or perhaps into a pre-approval reply. Regardless, I promoted the topic. And I was rather supportive to her efforts (see here). But Then I saw that she now had a banner ad, complete with link, as her signature (alas I didn't save a copy). This really crossed the line into "signature spammer" (getting your link exposure to enhance the search engine ranking). But I guess I pretty much said all the in the above quoted suspension message. AdminnemooseusOr something like that. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
Epub 2011 Jan 20 Apparently as least some of your references were published online. Being that this is an online forum, is it asking too much that you give links to the online versions???
But she's the one making the claim. She's the one who needs to justify her claim. You were also making your own claims, without supplying reference(s). Look, even if one is not doubting the accuracy of your information, one might still be interested in looking at the source material that backs up your information. Not every last detail calls for a reference. But if it is a major point on your part (as this was), it does call for a reference. If you tap an online source for your information, give us a link to that source. AdminnemooseusOr something like that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
From Message 385
quote: While we (Minnemooseus et all) of the evolution side do find creationism (and especially YEC) to be silly, repeatedly replying with such things as the "almost fell off my unicorn" graphic is no way to carry on a debate. Coyote could also back off on using his collection of favorite Heinlein quotations as replies. Replies welcome. This topic is the place, not at the "Report Discussion Problems Here 4.0" topic. AdminnemooseusOr something like that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
At some point all you can do is laugh. Then you need to keep your laughter to yourself, and not post it as messages. I know I do such (although it's probably more a sigh or a groan), as probably do many other members here. AdminnemooseusOr something like that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
There has been some discussion of Faith's current 1 month suspension, starting here.
The Public Record suspension announcement is here. Adminnemooseus Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Add 2nd sentence.Or something like that. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined:
|
From here:
Adminnemooseus writes: Please clarify what you mean by the terms "*******", "********", and "*********". Or are they just indicators that you are a wacko and your message(s) should be cast into the garbage heap? Go ahead, in this case, reply to this message to clarify your topic position. Adminnemooseus Response from here:
Davidjay writes: Calling me a wacko, is surely not an appropriate way of getting me to tell you who ******** and ****** represent. Besides its on my weebsite if you really want to research it and get into greater detail. I obviously didn;t tell you because all you need to know was already present and explained. If you have a real question concerning the topic, to consider asking it more politely. Thanks David Considering that your participation at this forum much rests in my opinion of you, you might have responded to the polite (I said "Please") request of sentence one. Instead, you gave me an implied "Yes" to the question of sentence two. AdminnemooseusOr something like that. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined:
|
My recent Davidjay permanent suspension was, for a here lack of a better term, rejected by Admin as not being appropriate because proper procedure was not followed.
I therefore have abdicated most all responsibility for Davidjay control to Admin. There is, of course, that "don't feed the troll" concept. If the various members don't think a Davidjay message is worthy of a reply, maybe they shouldn't reply. I think his messages do a pretty good job of displaying that Davidjay is a wackjob's wackjob. See signature. AdminnemooseusOr something like that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined:
|
First of all, the damn asterisks are purely Davidjay's creation.
Can I suggest that a little self-moderation is in order? Why respond to his garbage? Wouldn't we be better ignoring all the bollox and only responding when he says something that has actual content? I could give you a POTM for that statement, but I'm not going to. I absolutely agree with the above quoted. And I would ask that when another member does respond to a Davidjay message, s/he do it with high quality, snark free text. As I see it, it becomes much harder for an admin to come down on a Davidjay's bad behavior, when the others are blurring the distinction line by posting dubious quality of their own. It's hard to come down on a jerk, when the replier(s) are also being jerks. I guess I could do a suspension over a jerk posting, and also suspend any other members posting like reply messages. See signature. AdminnemooseusOr something like that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
It's hard to come down on a jerk, when the replier(s) are also being jerks. I add, when you feed a troll, your may be becoming one with the troll. If such is the case, the admins might be justified in doing a troll mass suspension. AdminnemooseusOr something like that.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024