Creationist Admins

TO: BuzzsawPerhaps you could be a roving part time moderator who doesn't take any request but moderates on what he does see. I do think that is workable perhaps. You could even state that in your signature that you take no moderation request. The creationists could gravitate to the threads you are participating in if they felt so inclined.Sincerely,KenThis message has been edited by kendemyer, 11-14-2004 09:48 PM

Hi Ken. Welcome back to main street in evo town. That's how much I know about moderating. I wasn't aware it's done by request. How does that work? Someone makes a request and the mod checks out the problem? I don't recall ever requesting any moderator to take specific action or hone in on a given post/poster. I assumed the moderator reads a whole lot and searches out trouble spots to trouble shoot. Maybe this's some of what should be discussed with Moose in a great debate discussion??This message has been edited by buzsaw, 11-14-2004 09:58 PM

TO: BuzzsawI am guessing the moderation process is done by both processes - observation and request.Secondly, I nominate you to be a part time, roving, non-request taking creationist moderator. Do you wish to accept the nomination?Sincerely,KenThis message has been edited by kendemyer, 11-14-2004 10:01 PM

I think I'd rather talk things over with Moose to determine whether such a limited thing would be effective. Actually, it seems that requests might require less time than searching out problems cold turkey.

I am a hardcore creationist as you people say but I can recognize that both evolution and creation have their problems. I respect everybody here and expect to be respected as well. With that said, I'm interested in taking a shot at the creationist admin position.

---

Ponlo todo en las manos de Dios y que se joda el mundo. El principio de la sabiduria es el temor a Jehova

I agree that the Admins persecute non-evos actively........if you, as so many admins have stated, think that being a scientific creationist makes you logically invalid (and I agree, BTW), then you shouldn't call this the "evolution vs. creation" forum. You should call it the "here's why creationism is wrong, and we'll restrict your participation level if you disagree too much" forum.Now, if you want to keep hardcore creationists out of strictly scientific debate, that's fine. But, in those cases, the evo admins should be allowed to both participat in AND moderate a thread. I've seen many an admin on here participate in a debate and, when things get heated, pull the admin card to give themselves an unfair advantage. And there's no reason there shouldn't be intelligent design admins, as intelligent design advocates are 100% scientific in their approach, regardless of whether or not you regard them as 100% scientific in the conclusions they reach.Also, not every subject on here IS strictly scientific.......many are philosophical, and those forums SHOULD HAVE CREATIONIST ADMINS.This message has been edited by RisenLord, 11-15-2004 12:53 AM

We all make mistakes of course.However, I think it will be necessary for you to show where someone has been chastised (and more, moved to boot camp or suspended) for disagreeing too much instead of violating forum guidelines such as supporting assertions with evidence, making the case yourself and respecting others.This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 11-15-2004 01:36 AM

I believe we should have more creationist admins (Dawg, here is somewhere you could jump in). What do you see as being the responsibilities of an admin?How, exactly, would a creationist admin do something different? I'm guessing a bit, but I think you'll find in the non-scientific topics there is somewhat less administrative "meddling". However, in all fora the guidelines still hold. How would a creationist admin handle that?There seems to be much less creationist discussion in the scientific fora. Many of us have no particular argument with religious beliefs. We do have a strong disagreement with those who claim to be creation "scientists" and want to meddle with the eductional system. However, those who think there should be some such meddling seem to avoid the science threads. I suspect this is because when they do dip a toe in they find the water much too hot.Why shouldn't a creationist admin be involved there too? Perhaps especially there. What would they do differently?You do know that anyone can "play admin" if they want and point out where the guidelines could be followed better. They just can't suspend anyone or restrict them in any way. You might also note that very few people actually do get restrictions. Which ones do you think were restricted unfairly and why?

I've seen everyone on these boards violate the rules, in some small way. But the punishment isn't dealt out even-handedly.

Why? Atheists have been meddling with said system for years. You teach evolution (which is fine), and then insert abiogenesis........to make it look like materialistic abiogenesis is as supported and universally accepted as evolution. You've made Big Bang theory synonymous with evolution to the layman's mind, so that many regretably ignorant people don't realize that the Big Bang actually had THEISTIC suggestion to it. his is intentional misleading. Creationism shouldn't be taught in science classes, but neither should atheism.........

Hi Risen, I think you're badly mistaken. I was a 'non-evo' for about 4 months or so on here and I never once experienced "persecution" of any sort nor did I witness any persecution of others. You've been a member less than a full month and you've seen many an admin do this? Please stick around, participate a little longer, and you'll find this really isn't the case.

Ned brought up some really good questions that you could answer. Please do so. If you want to debate what should be in the educational curriculum, there is a forum for that.This message has been edited by AdminDawg, 11-15-2004 02:51 AM

But I can read posts from years ago, if I wish......

Hey, Ned brought up the topic........

My official position is that I don't know. But I am open to the HP theory and the ToE and OEC and YEC. I think some version of evolution happened, and I think the flood happened. I cannot say more than that.This message has been edited by AdminDawg, 11-15-2004 02:59 AM