Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (8871 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 10-22-2018 12:16 AM
203 online now:
DrJones*, PaulK, RAZD (3 members, 200 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: paradigm of types
Post Volume:
Total: 840,524 Year: 15,347/29,783 Month: 1,291/1,502 Week: 48/241 Day: 1/47 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1617181920
21
Author Topic:   General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 10.0
Admin
Director
Posts: 12560
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002


Message 301 of 305 (410311)
07-14-2007 9:29 AM
Reply to: Message 300 by berberry
07-14-2007 8:42 AM


To Berberry,
Hi Berberry,

Not everyone is going to see what is so obvious to you, I'm sure you understand that. Sometimes those people who don't see your point of view will be persons in positions of considerable responsibility, or if not then at least moderators at EvC Forum. :)

This is not to agree with you or with AdminPD, but just to share with you my own feeling that enough people understand your point that it will not get lost or smothered, even if it doesn't happen to get adequately expressed in any particular individual thread. But it is incumbent upon me to also point out that EvC Forum is not a haven for the easily offended, and that being offended, or even being the target of a blatant Forum Guidelines violation, doesn't excuse one from the Forum Guidelines.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 300 by berberry, posted 07-14-2007 8:42 AM berberry has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5593
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 302 of 305 (410342)
07-14-2007 12:25 PM
Reply to: Message 300 by berberry
07-14-2007 8:42 AM


Re: To AdminPD
The comparison of gay sex to rape is crystal clear. If it isn't clear to you, then just what do you think that moralizing bastard was talking about?

The general philosophy for those who maintain a secular worldview believe in "live and let live." That means, let me believe in whatever I want to, and let me do whatever I want to do, so long as I don't hurt anybody.

Taz basically said that gay sex doesn't hurt him. So I made the comment that just because he hasn't personally been raped, does that mean rape isn't wrong?

One had nothing to do with the other. It had everything to do with his methodology.

This is a long-standing pattern with nemjug, going back much further than even his comparison of gays to animals last year

No it isn't. The only one whoever really understood what I was getting at was Holmes, who was an atheist, pro-gay, pro-abortion guy-- hardly someone who would advocate for me unless he understood what I was saying.

I'm not saying, nor have I ever said, that homosexuals are exactly like pedophiles or zoophiles. My reason for mentioning it so that you can understand my position better. If you say that homosexuality is good, but pedophilia is bad, while maintaining a morally relativistic view, you commit debate suicide. I just want you to be aware of that.

This is the millionth time that I've gone over it. I suspect that you know exactly what I'm talking about, but you can't really defend your position so its easier for you to just chime in with name calling-- which is traditionally what people resort to when they're losing a debate. You make the inference.

I should think anyone of even the meanest intelligence, if not "washed in the blood of jesus" or what the fuck ever, would be able to detect nemjug's condescending and patronizing attitude toward anyone, and especially gays, who do not share his narrow-minded and unabashedly bigoted world-view.

You do realize how oxymoronic it is to say that I have a narrow-minded worldview while not believing in any moral absolutes, right? It all boils down to opinion. So why would my opinion be viewed more narrowly than yours? Think deeply about it Berberry. The answer is staring you in the face. You can call it condescending if you want. I call it reasonable.


"The problem of Christianity is not that it has been tried and found wanting, but that it is difficult and left untried" -G.K. Chesterton
This message is a reply to:
 Message 300 by berberry, posted 07-14-2007 8:42 AM berberry has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5593
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 303 of 305 (410345)
07-14-2007 12:41 PM
Reply to: Message 298 by PaulK
07-14-2007 5:23 AM


Re: Sleazy creationist tactics
Virtually all IDists are Creationists. So that's not much of aa distinction.

There is a major distinction. One group does not invoke the image of a Creator, only reasons that there must be one, while the other invokes specific images and rules for the game.

And your second point is disproven by the dates in the thread itself. The first post was possted on 04-08-2007. Your reply was posted on 07-08-2007. That's three months. April to July. So you did revive a months-old thread, and - given the way this forum works - it would be hard for you not to know it.

For whatever reason, Syamsu's post fell under the radar. If you'll note, my reply was the first reply ever. I revived nothing because it was never alive to begin with.

quote:
All you have to do is address my post IN Showcase if you have a problem with it and debate the issue there

Not true. I believe that I currently have access to Showcase, however that was granted to pursue one particular thread - not that one. So by replying to you I would be going against the conditions under which the access was granted. Unless access has been generally opened - which I have no memory of - then many people have no access to Showcase.

Showcase is open for business. There is literally nothing that would prohibited you from posting a reply in Showcase. If you could only gain access from an Admin, just ask one. I'm an Admin. You want in? I'll make it happen.

I would like the Admins to close the thread and make you go through the usual process to start a thread.

What for?!?!?

I can't respond to someone else's thread? Seriously, what exactly is your objection?

actually follow the forum rules rather than let you take advantage of the Showcase forum.

Point out what "rule" I'm breaking Paul. If you can do that, I'll concede.

Telling the truth about you is a "slanderous accusation" - while you feel free to make vicious and baseless accusations against anybody who doesn't agree with your views. It's just so typical.

What great "truth" about me have you exposed, Paul? And what vicious and baseless accusations have I made? I thought I was in here to debate. The viciousness and baseless accusations seem to be all on your side of the table.


"The problem of Christianity is not that it has been tried and found wanting, but that it is difficult and left untried" -G.K. Chesterton
This message is a reply to:
 Message 298 by PaulK, posted 07-14-2007 5:23 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 304 by PaulK, posted 07-14-2007 12:54 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14419
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 304 of 305 (410348)
07-14-2007 12:54 PM
Reply to: Message 303 by Hyroglyphx
07-14-2007 12:41 PM


Re: Sleazy creationist tactics
quote:

There is a major distinction. One group does not invoke the image of a Creator, only reasons that there must be one, while the other invokes specific images and rules for the game.


No, if you believe in special creation - as most IDists do - you are a creationist. If you don't want to admit to wehat you beleive it doesn't make you any less a creationist.

quote:

For whatever reason, Syamsu's post fell under the radar. If you'll note, my reply was the first reply ever. I revived nothing because it was never alive to begin with.

i.e. what I said was true. Your only excuse was that nobody else bothered to reply at all. Which only makes reviving it worse, not better.

quote:

Showcase is open for business. There is literally nothing that would prohibited you from posting a reply in Showcase. If you could only gain access from an Admin, just ask one. I'm an Admin. You want in? I'll make it happen.

I am also an Admin. Howeve Showcase was inended for discussions involving particular people who were restricted to Showcase. And there are none currently active. It is not for others to slip around the PNT rules, or to raise obsacles to others who might wish to reply

quote:

What for?!?!?

I can't respond to someone else's thread? Seriously, what exactly is your objection?


If you have to ask why you shouldn't abuse the forum's rules for your own convenience maybe you shouldn't be an Admin. You have avoided the requirement for PNT and you are abusing the Showcase forum.

quote:

What great "truth" about me have you exposed, Paul?

A typical rhetorical trick - I never said anything about a "great" truth. Just ordinary truth. All I am saying is that the points I made were true. And you called them slander. So that's one example. We can point to your reply in the post, or the attacks you made on the ACLU.

quote:

The viciousness and baseless accusations seem to be all on your side of the table.

Why ? What have I said that wasn't true ? Vount that as another example of a vicious and false accusation


This message is a reply to:
 Message 303 by Hyroglyphx, posted 07-14-2007 12:41 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

  
AdminPhat
Administrator
Posts: 1878
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-03-2004


Message 305 of 305 (410350)
07-14-2007 1:00 PM


Thread Closed
This topic continues at General Discussion 11.0

We could lay our discussions end to end and never reach any conclusions! :rolleyes:


  
RewPrev1
...
1617181920
21
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018