The Evolution of evcforum.net

I think it was also the reason the "Boot Camp" forum was tried - A compromise between doing nothing and (an upcoming?) suspension.Adminnemooseus

Thanks for your clarification, Amminnemooseus. I see I was mistaken; Mirabile has not been suspended. Yet.

---

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

Ooops. Guess I was off topic, sorry about that.

Hi Ben,I’d say that all your purposes are relevant to what EvC is trying to achieve, but I think that the problem lies here: We are here for different purposes, for example some are here for no reason other than to preach the gospel, some are here to disrupt, and some are here to try and undermine religion. So we are not all singing from the same hymn sheet, but some are. Well, what I think may be happening is not just that there is a different purpose for your opponent being here, some may have a completely different understanding of how to approach a subject in a scientific manner.Take my area as an example. How many people have approached archaeology/Near Eastern history/Old Testament Studies with a very simplistic understanding of these subjects? Many of the people I discuss these topics with really do not have the basic enquiry skills to construct legitimate arguments. The historio/scientific method is way beyond a lot of these people, but the problem is that these people really think that they are approaching these subjects properly! They do not see a problem with simply making statements because they haven’t been taught to scrutinise and criticise sources. Yesterday we had a guy here who is a perfect example of this, he claimed that a chariot wheel in the Red Sea supports an Exodus and sea crossing, now anyone with a basic understanding of archaeology and historical methodologies knows that this is one big non sequitur but this guy obviously feels that it is good evidence, he may well be puzzled as to why I am underwhelmed about this discovery.So, the problem is not just the different purposes, it is the different approaches to scientific, historio/scientific methodologies of members that is a big problem. This is supported by the number of topics that creationists have had rejected, and also by the very few new PNT creationists have even bothered to start. I can sympathise in a way because they genuinely think that they have constructed valid arguments and that we are being too picky and because of that we are getting a name as being an anti-creationist website. Now, I know we aren’t, and I’d say a high percentage of members know we aren’t, but it LOOKS bad, so I say let them post weak OP’s and the more knowledgeable posters can point out the errors and give advice. Even if the topic originator goes off in a huff we have at least helped some lurkers, but when it comes down to the PNT we are not even getting a chance to point out errors because so many PNT’s are being rejected, or creationists maybe do not feel that their PNT has a chance of being approved by our rigid clearing procedures.But I think that this is where we can actually make EvC a valuable resource. By allowing a lower level of accepted opening posts we can all point out what is required to support an argument, not just admins but all members can do this, and admins can step in when things get personal. Even when a fundy type post is being ripped apart it is valuable because it helps to improve your own knowledge. I always triple check everything before I post (if it is my area) and sometimes this leads me to enquire more about a topic, so I improve my own knowledge.Also, I wonder how many people here have had private e-mails from lurkers thanking them for providing information/answers to something that has been troubling them for a long time, or saying how impressed they are with your knowledge of the topic, or even someone asking them to look over an essay they have written? I have had countless emails from lurkers of the type mentioned, and I bet quite a few members here have too, so we are providing a service. I have even been offered two admin posts at two different sites because of my participation at EvC so we shouldn’t underestimate just how many interested lurkers there are out there.But, we do need to do something because, as some people have pointed out, this site is a shadow of what it was.I don’t have all the answers, but perhaps we could have an area where topics do not need to be screened, and an area for ”higher level debate’?Can I finish by saying that I love it here at EvC, I am only moaning because this is a great place and I have made many friends here, if I didn’t love the place I’d go to another board and watch this place continue to sink.Brian.

I never have received any private e-mails. I take that back. I got one lousy e-mail, and that was from an Admin. wanting to know what forum I wanted to put a PNT in. Finally I got fed up and got rid of my e-mail address. My job is to enlighten lurkers, and I haven't enlightened anybody. Here I am taking all this time to compose pure and precise prose and deftly plagiarize obscure books that nobody has read; I've provided discourse upon the contexts, frames of reference and points of observation which would determine the nature, origin, and meaning of data if I had any data; I've tirelessly labored to simplify arguments to the point of the commonplace; I've bent over backwards to argue about subjects of which I know nothing--and what have I gotten out of it? Some kicks in the butt, a black-eyed ego or two, a shove in the face. Nobody gives a damn; nobody cares.You're quite right, Brian. This place is shitty.This message has been edited by robinrohan, 10-28-2005 02:58 PM

Maybe I should be more explicit, Brian. Send not to know, Brian, for whom the bell tolls: it tolls for thee.If you want to improve the forum, do it yourself--with your own intelligent posts!

---

"Turning out pigs for creationists makes me blue and blurry."--Brad McFall

Au contraire,Rob. I find you and The Literalist do a public service by forcing members to explain the full ramifications of their posts. Each 'i' dotted and 't' crossed, which makes us more thorough in our explanations. Not so much a devil`s advocate, more a devil`s pedant.BTW, how`s EvC--the Musical coming along?

It's coming along, and I'll get you good. Calling me a pedant . . .
I got my eye on you.

I wouldn't say it is shitty, but it is heading that way.It will pick up soon when God tells Percy to lower the bar for the fundies. Brian.

Well, you will be mercilessly satirized with your blinking eye. I hate that damn thing. Coming on here and criticizing people! How dare you?This message has been edited by robinrohan, 10-29-2005 08:56 PM

I'm beginning to find the eye a bit disturbing myself. I am going to change it, but I need something equally disturbing. Do you have photograph I could borrow? The Messiah can do whatever He wants to.Brian.

LOL.

Here's another way to open up debate:Those who post here a lot tend to have better PNT than newbies. Why not open up the forums for direct topic opening for all members over "X" posts?If topics are wildly poor, they can always be closed by admins, and the user can be admonished. If it happens consistently with a user, then such powers can easily be turned off.Since this would require a software feature, a hack that we could make work for now would be to have a "request permission to open new topics" thread, where individual users can request to be granted such permissions. We'd open it up to a bunch of people right away, but fewer and fewer. It wouldn't take much admin work... after the initial blow through. But I think the admin tools might be good enough to help handle it pretty smoothly.Maybe that's an acceptable medium point that would be acceptable to all, and could be implemented with a minimum of work.

Good idea. Speeds up the process. Sometimes PNT's sit around for awhile because the mods do not have time to get to them. By the time they get promoted, interest is lost.

Au contraire, Brian--robinrohan is a Gallant: I'm not sure if he's the devil's, though.