Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Thread Reopen Requests
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 61 of 305 (68893)
11-24-2003 12:16 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by AdminAsgara
11-23-2003 9:29 PM


Thus ends the experiment, on what happens to a dubious (non?)topic, if you let it run free.
To MtW - My impression is, that you started off on shakey ground, and then earned significant respect at this forum. Now, you seemed to have largely squandered that respect. Time to earn it back.
As far as I'm concerned, the topic stays closed.
Adminnemooseus
------------------
Comments on moderation procedures? - Go to
Change in Moderation?
or
too fast closure of threads

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by AdminAsgara, posted 11-23-2003 9:29 PM AdminAsgara has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by mike the wiz, posted 11-24-2003 8:29 AM Adminnemooseus has not replied

mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 62 of 305 (68923)
11-24-2003 8:29 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by Adminnemooseus
11-24-2003 12:16 AM


Since God is no respector of persons, disrespect will not bother me too much.
To MtW - My impression is, that you started off on shakey ground, and then earned significant respect at this forum.
Hmmmm. I didn't think this was about my personal 'situation'. The topic was about anything, so I posted anything I wanted. Now unsatisfaction is the conclusion with the admin. This is is a bit bizarre as my posts were not made in a 'bad' way, as you can see, Brad wasn't offended and neither was it my intention. Your the boss but I still don't think my 'different' posting was a bad thing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Adminnemooseus, posted 11-24-2003 12:16 AM Adminnemooseus has not replied

mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 63 of 305 (68939)
11-24-2003 9:34 AM


What about other posters?
Do they think I am an evil creo ?

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by zephyr, posted 11-26-2003 8:58 AM mike the wiz has not replied

Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 64 of 305 (69327)
11-25-2003 10:31 PM


Re: Closing the "Some Evidence for Creation" thread.
In fairness, I think Willowtree's intention all along had been to discuss the resurrection. The flaw in the thread seemed to have been a poor choice of titles, rather than topic drift.
{Note from Adminnemooseus - Topic renamed "Considerations of Christ's Resurrection" and re-opened.}
[This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 11-26-2003]

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 11-26-2003 6:14 PM Dan Carroll has not replied

mark24
Member (Idle past 5194 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 65 of 305 (69363)
11-26-2003 8:52 AM


Adminmoose,
Any chance of resurrecting this thread, please?
Thanks,
Mark

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by NosyNed, posted 11-26-2003 10:42 AM mark24 has not replied

zephyr
Member (Idle past 4549 days)
Posts: 821
From: FOB Taji, Iraq
Joined: 04-22-2003


Message 66 of 305 (69366)
11-26-2003 8:58 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by mike the wiz
11-24-2003 9:34 AM


Not evil by any means. However, in my opinion, you're edging toward "disruptive" and "confusing" in some of your recent posts. I find myself making a whole lot of funny faces while reading them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by mike the wiz, posted 11-24-2003 9:34 AM mike the wiz has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 67 of 305 (69388)
11-26-2003 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by mark24
11-26-2003 8:52 AM


I'm with Mark on that one. Can we have it back now? How about if I type v e r y slowly?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by mark24, posted 11-26-2003 8:52 AM mark24 has not replied

Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 68 of 305 (69447)
11-26-2003 6:14 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by Dan Carroll
11-25-2003 10:31 PM


CENSORSHIP
What are you talking about. Did you bother to carefully read my topic ? In it I clearly say "How does any of this evidence creationism ?" Then I proceeded to answer the question. You must be some kind of wacko censor or an idiot or an angry atheist getting a dig in because you do not like my point. My master point DID evidence creationism and this is not a matter of opinion if you read my entire topic. For you to claim to speak for me is pure dishonesty for I would rather my topic be completely erased rather than the fundementalist ax of censorship ruin my entire point. Thanks for ruining my topic you bleephole W.T.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Dan Carroll, posted 11-25-2003 10:31 PM Dan Carroll has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Rei, posted 11-26-2003 6:28 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied
 Message 70 by Rand Al'Thor, posted 11-26-2003 7:57 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Rei
Member (Idle past 7012 days)
Posts: 1546
From: Iowa City, IA
Joined: 09-03-2003


Message 69 of 305 (69452)
11-26-2003 6:28 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by Cold Foreign Object
11-26-2003 6:14 PM


Re: CENSORSHIP
Willowtree,
It's ok - I promise! Just meet back to the other thread and resume the conversation - the thread is still open, and we can still discuss what you wanted to discuss.
------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 11-26-2003 6:14 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Rand Al'Thor
Inactive Member


Message 70 of 305 (69477)
11-26-2003 7:57 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by Cold Foreign Object
11-26-2003 6:14 PM


Re: CENSORSHIP
Ok WT time for some Decaff coffee.
No one is out to get you, no one is trying to impair your ability to debate. What was being discussed in the thread was very different from the title. So in order to ensure the survival of the thread the Admins changed the title to better suit what was being discussed.
NOTHING in your original message was changed. Just take a breath and CALM DOWN!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 11-26-2003 6:14 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by AdminAsgara, posted 11-26-2003 8:07 PM Rand Al'Thor has not replied

AdminAsgara
Administrator (Idle past 2302 days)
Posts: 2073
From: The Universe
Joined: 10-11-2003


Message 71 of 305 (69478)
11-26-2003 8:07 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by Rand Al'Thor
11-26-2003 7:57 PM


Re: CENSORSHIP
I want to thank Rand and Rei for their attempts to smooth over WT's excessive and unwarranted anger.
The thread has been closed again for now (a pity, because I found it quite interesting in my non-Admin mode)
Moose and Percy, of course, will do as their conscience dictates, but as for me, I will not open it again until WT directly asks and assures me that the invectives will stop.
------------------
AdminAsgara
Queen of the Universe

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Rand Al'Thor, posted 11-26-2003 7:57 PM Rand Al'Thor has not replied

apostolos
Inactive Member


Message 72 of 305 (72483)
12-12-2003 7:24 AM


drifting of Topic: Innocents in Hell, Guilty in Heaven?
Adminnemooseus,
I have a humble request. I have slowly gathered the opinion that you are almost like the executioner of straying topics. I do appreciate the willingness of admins to be quick to kill threads that are plunged headlong into confusion. But I am somewhat nervous that you would even suggest that this topic be closed because it fills me with a dread that the axe will very soon drop.
So here I am prostrate before your authority (figuratively speaking of course) begging you to hold off the killing blow until at least I have had a chance to hear Dan C's response. Really I would like to keep this thread open so the ideas that Dan and I have been going back and forth on can be further discussed. But ultimately I understand that I am only a visitor here and respect the fact that you (and other Big Brothers...er, um, I mean Admins) have the right to make the final decision.
Russ
PS - While I take the subject matter of this post very seriously, I hope you have seen that my delivery has included several attempts at humor.
I have included the original post in its entirety so that an accurate conclusion can be reached.. I am a little bothered (and it may just be me) because I wonder if, in my finding humor in one of functions of admins, I have actually created strife. I want to say first, Adminnemooseus, that I was not intending to insult you or any other admin and apologize if I have communicated contrary to this. I am not trying to kiss up or anything, I just really do not feel good about disrespect and it bothers me no small amount that I may have inadvertently been disrespectful to admins. Perhaps I am wrong though...please let me know.
The issue is that I just didn't want this thread to get closed because Dan had not yet responded. I agreee vehemently that it was straying. However, I think that was due to some statements that appeared to be within the realm of normative discussion but actually were intended to stir up an emotional word battle rather than a reasonable discussion. While I do not claim immunity to this disorder, I do not see any of that strife taking place in the posts between myself and Dan. However, you can't exactly have a thread in that forum be exclusive. So then, if my comments on that thread have attracted a negative type of argumentation by any persons, then I must whole-heartedly concur on the closure of the thread, even though it is against my true desire.
Regardless, I will stand by whatever decision the admins make.
Russ

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-12-2003 11:20 AM apostolos has replied

Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 73 of 305 (72511)
12-12-2003 11:20 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by apostolos
12-12-2003 7:24 AM


Re: drifting of Topic: Innocents in Hell, Guilty in Heaven?
I have reviewed the topic more closely (Yes, I do sometimes make snap judgements without first doing a close study - That's why you sometimes see such terms as "I suspect" and "my impression" in my messages).
The topic seems to have started its turn off-topic starting at message 45. This is after the material of Dan's, that you are interested in.
The discussions of message 45 and the follow ups do have there own merits. It is that side topic that I was suggesting be moved to a new topic. The basic reality is, that I really don't like seeing interesting and quality discussion being buried in a topic it does not belong in.
The bottom line is, that you probably thought I was closer to closing the topic, than I really was. I guess that I think that a "topic about to close" type message is an effective tool towards jolting things back on topic.
Regardless, closed topics can, and have been reopened. I usually include the link to this topic, at the end of my topic closing messages. When I don't, it probably means that I think it is obvious that the topic has gone terminally bad.
Adminnemooseus

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by apostolos, posted 12-12-2003 7:24 AM apostolos has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by apostolos, posted 12-14-2003 5:06 PM Adminnemooseus has replied

AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 74 of 305 (72587)
12-12-2003 5:40 PM


Our new Evil Twin
In case you haven't noticed we have a new, annoying poster. Perhaps you can word a stronger suggestion that s/he smarten up.

apostolos
Inactive Member


Message 75 of 305 (72861)
12-14-2003 5:06 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by Adminnemooseus
12-12-2003 11:20 AM


Re: drifting of Topic: Innocents in Hell, Guilty in Heaven?
Adminnemooseus,
I apologize for introducing arguments that strayed off the main topic. I really did think I was answering the main question. In fact, I thought that the course Dan and I were persuing was the most direct route to discussion the original point raised. Regardless, my question now is: Now what? I would like to see what Dan has to say, and others, but wonder if this might not ever happen given there is no thread to discuss it. I could start a new thread, but the problem there is that it would not have the momentum already established in the previous thread. So I am looking for a little directional help I guess.
Russ

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-12-2003 11:20 AM Adminnemooseus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-15-2003 12:21 AM apostolos has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024