Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 50 (9179 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,204 Year: 5,461/9,624 Month: 486/323 Week: 126/204 Day: 26/16 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consequtive Consecution Sequel
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17853
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 49 of 302 (300003)
04-01-2006 5:28 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by kjsimons
03-31-2006 5:34 PM


Re: Randman rises again!
I have to say that "completley logical" is a wierd description of Randman's behavior in that thread. Even at the start one of his pieces of evidence wasn't even referring to the t.o website, instead referrign to some postings on the t.o newsgroup - and even that did not support hte accusations that were supposedly based on it.
In the revival of the trhead Randman was arguign that an essay claimed that universal common descent wa sa fact despite contianing an explicit statement to the contrary, based on a quote from ANOTHER essay, without weven making any connection between the two and even even based on the grounds that he had introduced the quote earlier.
Does Christian think that "I introduced this quote from another essay earlier in the thread so it is in the essay we are discussing now, even if it isn't?" is a logical argument ?
Does Christian think Randman's inability to recognise that HE personally had restricted discussion to a single essay is logical - even when links and quotes are produced to prove it ?
Quite frankly I think that Christian needs to think very carefully about the decision and examine the evidence more carefully, because so far as I can tell her judgement is completely at odds with the reality of the situation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by kjsimons, posted 03-31-2006 5:34 PM kjsimons has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by arachnophilia, posted 04-01-2006 5:48 AM PaulK has replied
 Message 55 by randman, posted 04-01-2006 3:59 PM PaulK has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17853
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 51 of 302 (300005)
04-01-2006 6:13 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by arachnophilia
04-01-2006 5:48 AM


Re: Randman rises again!
Personally I think that the ban was merited. I don't know if you've reviewed the relevant posts, but so far as I can tell he was reduced to abusive and irrational ranting.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by arachnophilia, posted 04-01-2006 5:48 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by arachnophilia, posted 04-01-2006 7:42 AM PaulK has not replied
 Message 54 by AdminNWR, posted 04-01-2006 10:00 AM PaulK has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17853
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 145 of 302 (304140)
04-14-2006 3:38 AM
Reply to: Message 138 by NosyNed
04-13-2006 7:12 PM


Re: The boycott
Since the purpose of the boycott is to demand the right to falsely accuse others of being liars I can't see that it stands any chance of success.
Even if there was no blanket ban on accusations of lying what Ray wants would still be contrary to the rules. Accusing people of lying for no reason other than that they disagree with the beliefs of the accuser would still be contrary to the rules of the forum.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by NosyNed, posted 04-13-2006 7:12 PM NosyNed 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