General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 14.0

1. I had not been active in that thread for quite a long time at the time I issued the warning. There had been over 20 messages since my last parcipation.2. My action had nothing to do with me or anything I posted.3. This is suppose to be a fair and balanced board. As I stated, Obvious Child's violation was similar to yours.4. You may not consider the term to be vulgar, but by and large it is considered to be a vulgar word in the public fora.5. In the context, the demeanor of the response may seen by one's debate counterpart as inflamitory in nature which is not conducive to keeping the peace at EvC.We're not a board of prudes here but a respectable cite. Let's keep it civil as per Forum Guidelines with a reasonable concern for respect to one another.Perhaps it would be good for you to go back four messages from my warnng and note NWR's exemplary response to a similar situation. His response was . "That is clearly untrue."

Ringo, being one of two moderators for ideological balance in moderation it may be necessary to moderate in the same forum we participate.As for your suggestion that I use Percy for moderation example, he along with other admins regularly moderate in forums which they have partipated in.I think it's quite disingenuous and in violation of Forum Guidelines for you to disregard Admim action as you have here by the usage of vulgarity and uncivil wordage which I advised against.That's all I have to say regarding this matter (abe: for now). I'll leave it for other admins to rule on, given the controversial aspect of it. Edited by AdminBuzsaw, : clarification

Ideological balance is revelant here. I agreed with the admin warnings and NWR's actions in moderation of creationist Obvious Child regarding civility and respect. One of Admin's purposes in recruiting creationist moderators was to bring a balance to administration. Doesn't that make ideology relevant to this discussion?I figured since creationists are being held to item 10 of Forum Guidelines, perhaps it's time some of you people get with the rules as well and begin showing a reasonable (I say reasonable) amount of respect for your counterparts in the debates.

Mobiogirl, I realize others have used the term, but Brennakimi has been notorious for caustic responses in which this vulgar term is used in a very meanspirited manner as appeared to be the case here.My action was, in fact, nothing but a warning. I had hoped that others would respect the warning but Ringo's response a few messages back squelched those aspirations.I've been with EvC going on 5 years now. Maybe I'm mistaken but I believe vulgarity and meanspirited communication has been on the increase of late. Imo we should all work to maintain a respectful and hospitible atmosphere for the members and readers at large. If we don't draw the line somewhere the cite becomes an unpleasant experience for all.I said I was not going to say more on this, but it appears more responses were needful.

You either purposely ignore or completely miss my point, Brennakimi. Moderation balance is relative to the creo or evo ideology of the member as to which side of the isle the member is on.It has been determined in past discussion that member admins have a natural tendency to favor their own ideological kind. Get it?

1. This is not a thread to debate topics.2. You will get no more responses from me with this attitude and language. I'm an administrative moderator without pay but like the others require a reasonable amount of respect for the position.3. Unless the consensus among admins is that my action was out of order, I will be monitoring your conduct. If you violate the civility clause of item 10 which I have cited you will be subject to suspension.

Hi Trixie. I don't know where to find it and don't have the time to do all the reading necessary to search it out. It's in the archives somewhere.AdminPD, in the OP of this thread, has made it clear that this thread is not a discussion thread so other than what I've said I won't be engaging in any debate or further discussion on this.

There has been some discussion of this dispute in PAF. So far there doesn't appear to be a difinitive consensus in PAF as to whether BS is a permissible term other than better communication would be prefered. One admin's position was that the warning was warranted while another's position was that it would not warrant a suspension but better wordage preferred.I am moderating my position in that I will not be considering BS wordage as a guideline violation unless it is used in an obvious uncivil manner. This will be my position unless difinitive position by Admin or a consensus of admins is established.I will not be singling you out to monitor. That was a mistake on my part and over the line. I apologize for that. I will however as do other moderators be watchful for violations of guidelines across the board.

This is the first I was aware that members could initiate threads in Coffee House. I noted often that members would request Coffee House in the PNT forum and just assumed that was the rule.Prehaps this priviledge could be abused, but I suppose there's ways to prevent that. My apologies to Jar for the mistake.