Too much moderation on these boards?

Unless you are claiming immunity for creationists from this malady, it would be equally valid to argu that creationists cannot recognize evenhanded evo sites. If your argument is correct, you could be at an evenhanded evo site right now and not be aware of it because of your worldview.But your argument is wrong. In reality, while not always the case, bias can be very easy to detect. I refer you back to Message 20 and Message 21 about the Evolution Fairytale site - it is obviously biased just from its overt statements.Bias here at EvC Forum is much more subtle, and perhaps should not even be called bias. This is a science site, and many creationists find themselves at a disadvantage here because they are experts in faith and not science.There are some creationists who are very familiar with science, for example True Creation and Tranquility Base, but they suffer a similar disadvantage because they practice a backwards form of science where the conclusions are reached first and only then is the evidence sought. That their views are wrong is obvious from the fact that their views conflict, but they were discerning enough to avoid debating each other.If you want to see bias then just give me the name of any creationist run bulletin board and I'll post text from Faith's and Randman's posts under my own name (slightly edited to fit context) and get banned in no seconds flat. Safe bet, I think.--Percy

Wuold it imply a policy that there was that there was a two tier approach to dealing with the protagonists on the site in a general, all encompassing way?Would it attempt to shut down Robins satirical thread from the outset this year whereas last year his satire was postively encouraged. I looked at it from last year and it was cutting. But this year seemingly its out of bounds. It satires EvC central - as seen by some at EvC. Have these Creo sites something of a Big Brother approach?Would it attempt to invoke a "this is what science is" when a "this is what science is" is something of a core issue here?Edited by iano, : No reason given.

I find this comment interesting

quote:

---

Wuold it imply a policy that there was that there was a two tier approach to dealing with the protagonists on the site in a general, all encompassing way?

---

Are you complaining that this site is unfairly biased in favour of the creationists ?

Not to cherry pick your comments, but this one that sits at at the centre of your post. And it is wrong! EvC is not predominantly a science site. It is a Worldview site. Most posts do NOT deal with science. Most posts do not even attempt to. Most posts deal with what is perceived to be a reality which 'should' be apparent to the man on the street. Science barely plays a part in most posts here.And you know it. So why do you assert otherwise?

Complaining? No.I am questioning the assertion that that is the case. Jar and Schraf in particular have asserted so.I think it is anything but myself.

And what would you know about it ?

About what?

The bias on the site. It's always been towards the creos - the turnover of such characters is pretty high and if the board didn't cut slack to well people like faith who is generally here virtually 24/7 pumping out posts - who would there to debate with?Hell the place has even set up a special showcase forum where the more exterme cases can even control the debate!Edited by CK, : No reason given.

I'm asking how you could judge the bias on this board.

If person of admin status implied that "we" were biased in a particular way then I would have reason to suppose admin at large were biased - especially if Admin (the group) said nothing in particular against that that admins expressed view.

Your just a grunt CK. Your view is one in a thousand - not an admin stance (for which we await clarification)

Uh, yeah, right. And students learn about physics and biology and chemisty in Worldview class, and they go to university to get Bachelor of Worldview degrees, and creationism tries to get taught in Worldview class by claiming to be Worldview and not religion.--Percy

And the Admins have said that the board is less strict in enforcing the rules on creationists. Message 26 Message 36 Message 61 Message 76 - all allude to greater tolerance for creationists, all posted by Admins. 

I gathered that. And my question was why so? But for a thrashing out of the consequences of that (for there are many) one would have to discuss with admin (or Admin).

I'm waiting for one to bite me on the arse. Were you going to give some links to them or not?Once you've shown us a couple we can see if it if evenhanded at all. Will I be allowed to post my opinions and evidences there?