Should Simple be Suspended

(Added by edit - NOTE: PERCY/ADMIN CHANGED THE TITLE OF THIS TOPIC ON 2/10/04 - IT HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN "Simple Suspended". As in, Simple has been suspended}I was looking at this topic (work your way back)
http://EvC Forum: Noah's Flood and the Geologic Layers (was Noah's shallow sea)
and this topic (work your way back)
http://EvC Forum: Fossil sorting for simpleDiscusion to follow, I'm sure.Adminnemooseus[This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 02-10-2004]

---

Comments on moderation procedures? - Go to
Change in Moderation?
or
too fast closure of threads

Dont forget my personal favorite...http://EvC Forum: Hydroplates unchallenged young earth explains Tectonics shortcomings!

---

AdminAsgara
Queen of the Universe

I'd much prefer to see serious participants simply ignore trolls such as simple than to have the culprit suspended. Suspension allows the troll to claim that he has been persecuted or censored because of his faith. If a discussion is only continuing because of the persistence of a troll then it deserves to die a natural death. The thread might be resurrected at a later date when someone wants to continue a serious discussion.

If we only could get the such as Simple ignored.Whatever was given a short term suspension, that ended up being 48 hours.This one I think I'll leave in Admin Percy's hands. Simple can e-mail him at admin@, if he wishes to ask to be let back in.Adminnemooseus

I suspect I've slipped another event under your radar.AM

Hi, everyone!The admins seem to be working in an uncoordinated fashion recently. We'll try to do a better job.Since I had already begun to engage Simple yesterday afternoon, I'm going to try to pick up where I left off and restore his posting privileges. I was experimenting with a new approach by requesting that the evolution side exercise discipline and patience by persisting with the original points until they are understood before going on to subsequent points.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Administrator

Percy, your strategy will not work against a troll. The troll will fail to understand a point and continue to reiterate their error or bring up new points without resolution of the original point.Ignoring a troll after the rebuttal of their assertions is a more effective use of time and resources and does not result in frustration for serious posters. A troll does not provide an intellectual challenge for our knowledgeable and experienced posters and lurkers will appreciate the invalidity of the troll assertions and the rebuttals without monotonous repetition.

Call the "Simple Syndrome" troll, willfully ignorant, or oblivious to enlightenment - It all comes to the same result.Now, I'll define "troll" as one who deliberately posts garbage, just to cause trouble. The "willfully ignorant" are those so confidant that their position is correct that nothing is going to change their view. The subtle distinction between the "willfully ignorant" and the "oblivious to enlightenment" might be that the "oblivious" might be open to enlightenment, but are just incapable of understanding the opposing viewpoint.Anyhow, say we got 5 creationist posters that fall under the "Simple Syndrome" classification. At the same time, we have several of the evolution side side (the "Crashfrog/NosyNed Syndrome"), that are subject to responding to most every creationist posting. Result - A mess - A lot of heat with little light. The "Simple Syndrome" member does not operate (at least well) in a vacuum. Feedback from others is part of it all.Now, I encourage non-moderator members to function as moderating influences, in the absence of "the real thing". But "pile on" moderation is not much, if any better that "pile on" rebuttals.There is not proper room for every so inclined evolutionist to each respond to many of the creationist postings. Each individual evolutionist needs to have restraint. Try to limit the number of your responses in an individual topic. Try to not post redundant messages. Perhaps limit yourself to certain topics of particular interest to you.I would be great, to have a creationist moderator, to exert his/her influence on those of the "Simple Syndrome". I think that AdminTC and Adminquility (admin modes of TrueCreation and Tranquility Base) could be good at this. Alas, they were never active as moderators, and were thus retired from such status. TC currently does make an occasional appearance, but TB has totally dropped out of sight. TC, where are you? We need an active AdminTC to return.Mike the Wiz has been showing signs of being a moderate "enlightened" creationist, of forum moderator potential. But for now, I can't help thinking "Who are you, and what did you do with the real Mike the Wiz"?Various members, from both sides of the issue, are welcome to contact me (mnmoose@lakenet.com), with suggestions for new moderators (or even to volunteer as such). These communications will be kept private, to be only between the involved member, and those of the current "staff".Well, I had one more point to make, but the thought has left the building.Adminnemooseus{Edited to fix subtitle. Once again, the system doesn't like (") marks}[This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 02-07-2004]

I only read a few pages of one thread of simple's imput. The attitude, imo, was not good, in light of the fact that there should be enough respect and gratitude to Percy and the others who've worked so hard to provide this place to speak our mind to the www.On the other hand, some of the input of simple which likely worked towards the suspension is not a bit worse than a lot of the refuteless refute refuters on the other side are passing off as refutable refuting to refutees.One area where I guess I see this the most is the way many secularists seem to have the compulsion to refute anything that indicates anything that is the least bit indicative of a supernatural dimension regardless of how weak their argument. This all, bar none, goes unchecked by moderation or admin, who of course themselves are paranoid of the supernatural. This leaves posters like me with either ignoring such posts by multiple counterparts who rush to the defense of one another, regardless, and being loudly criticized for doing so or spending a good deal of the limited time I have to post on responding to a good deal of refuteless nonsense.I'm not saying this is always the case or that I simply don't get to some posts deserving of response. I'm saying that more attention is given to superfilous input by creationists by a chorus of adversaries, some of who superfilously superflow their own share of superfility.

I got a few chuckles out of your word usage buzz, despite any disagreements we may have. A little humor is needed around here at times.Perhaps you could join in with simple and buz in when you feel things are going the wrong direction. Perhaps summarizing the points made and how they relate to each other. IOW, you could help us trim the fat. You could also jump in and give your opinion of how the data presented in the posts does not refute the points the refuters have left refuteless .

hey what do i have to do to volunteer as a moderator or an admin. My time is limited but I think i can help you guys out if you need a creationist moderator or something like that

I think the only sensible thing for me to do, is to pass this one on to AdminBrad.AMps: Pending AB's opinion, I'll tentitivly concede that you are correct.

Adminnemooseus is in charge of appointing and disappointing moderators. I'm not familiar with your posts here, we probably contribute to different threads, but if Adminnemooseus, from what he's read by you, thinks you'd make a good moderator, that is up to him. If your time here has been too brief to form an opinion he could wait until more time has passed, or he could give you a trial period as moderator.--Percy

NO PROBLEM

You're close to another suspension.Adminnemooseus