General discussion of moderation procedures

I can 100% see what you closed my dell thread down in the coffee house but I'm pretty sure that "this could have gone in one of the humour threads" and then a close would have been sufficent.I'm not sure what purpose your denigration serves.This message has been edited by Charles Knight, 12-18-2004 10:34 AM{Added by edit: The referenced topic is here. - Adminnemooseus}This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 12-18-2004 11:05 AMThis message has been edited by Admin, 01-13-2005 09:50 AM

I agree with JonF, the nature of the material that Bill is presenting and the level that he is pitching at is going to inform and guide the style/terminology. As for the subject of references, I would perfer that Bill keeps them in - more and more of the academic journals are now providing their material online and those of us who have access are able to follow those up if we choose (I realise this brings questions of access).I'm not sure what Bill is suppose to do? Dumb his material down or provide inferior citations?While much of the discourse here is never going to follow the model that Bill is using, I say "more power to his keyboard finger!"This message has been edited by Charles Knight, 13-Mar-2005 06:28 PM

I don't know what the situation is in the states but it's the biggest con going in the UK:The Taxpayer funds research (via the funding councils) and then we basically have to pay to read the results! There was an govt inquiry and it found the profits that the publishers made on those publications to be huge (or so I remember it, I'll dig the report out in the morning).I'm in information sciences and I can't remember the last time I actually handled a journal - I just get the PDFs and download the citations straight into endnote.EDIT: OPPS off topic for here - where can we pick this up?

deleted - what's the point.This message has been edited by General Krull, 28-Apr-2005 06:58 PM

Unless I've missed something (like a ban or a suspension) - why are we operating very obvious double standards in regards to faith?Every other post involves calling someone an idiot or a fool, why are we holding atheists to higher standards ?What's the explanation?

But why do we have such a song and dance about debating the person and sticking to the rules for the rest of us? Why are we getting mods boring us all to death telling us that they are going to suspend "name-callers".It's pretty insulting really - People like Faith get special treatment because we (the board) don't think that they are capable of the self-control needed to debate without insults. It's just another way of treating them like children.

You seem to be struggling with an awful lot of rage and anger - maybe you need to take a break? do something in the real world? Take a few days off from here?

This is quite worrying,do you feel the need to lash out like this in the real world?Can I recommend this book? I know someone who used it and they feel a lot better now. Learn to shorten links pleaseobstructionistI am not familar with this word, I think you have just made it up - However if I understand what you are trying to state correctly I am neither a writer of turgid poems or a great fan of Ms.Rand.I hope this sets you mind at rest (and maybe helps your blood pressure).I would love to stay and chat but it's a nice day and I think I will go for a nice walk (practicing what I'm preaching).This message has been edited by General Krull, 06-May-2005 11:44 AMThis message has been edited by AdminJar, 05-06-2005 10:45 AM

Wow - the rage combined with the hair shirt must really itch. I can't for the life of me see why you keep coming back. Is it like an S&M thing? you whack one off to the threads?I'm truely baffled what your actual purpose is here.

I'll take your advice but I really must say.....Hello Kettle this is pot, you are black.

You are an idiot - have you considered how stupid and vapid that question is? (althought I suspect that holmes has something else in mind...)