Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 115 (8733 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-23-2017 7:55 PM
438 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Upcoming Birthdays: OnlyCurious
Post Volume:
Total: 801,894 Year: 6,500/21,208 Month: 2,261/2,634 Week: 449/572 Day: 66/99 Hour: 3/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
78
9
10111213Next
Author Topic:   Changes at EvC Forum
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 2247 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 121 of 191 (451400)
01-27-2008 3:52 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by Admin
01-27-2008 2:30 PM


Re: suggesting considering this is debate site
Wow.....thank you percy.

My wife may not feel the same way as posting on this forum can definitely take a lot of time away from work...;)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Admin, posted 01-27-2008 2:30 PM Admin has not yet responded

Admin
Director
Posts: 12389
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 122 of 191 (451401)
01-27-2008 3:53 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by Hyroglyphx
01-27-2008 3:27 PM


Re: Brief Answers
Nothing is forever. Let us see how things go for a little while before I give the question more consideration.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Hyroglyphx, posted 01-27-2008 3:27 PM Hyroglyphx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by Hyroglyphx, posted 01-27-2008 4:00 PM Admin has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5512
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006


Message 123 of 191 (451403)
01-27-2008 3:58 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by Admin
01-27-2008 3:17 PM


Re: Some Observations
I've often said that just like bad money pushes out good money (think inflation), bad debate pushes out good debate. The more threads become bogged down in endless haggling over side-issues, the less the forum hosts quality discussions and the less it draws quality participants.

I agree that bad debate pushes out good debate, but at the same time, controversial debates sucks people in like a sponge. This is why, like it or not, threads on homosexuality, abortion, etc drew large crowds.

Yes, it was divisive. And that is a problem. But good moderation can avoid these problems. It just requires some diligence and for some moderators not to involve themselves in their member status.

I've also argued many times that people don't change. Problem members, no matter what the specifics, will almost always remain problem members.

If it means anything to you, in response to my public apology, Berberry, of all people, has written me an email accepting my apology for which I am grateful for. He apologized to me, but I didn't accept his apology because he didn't have to apologize to me at all!

I meant what I said earlier. Whether it was all my fault or partly my fault is inconsequential to me. I want to eat all of it and wish to take full responsibility.

If Berberry and I can make reparations, even to the point where we may even hang out when he comes to California, why couldn't anyone else end the negativity?

More to the point, I have seen monumental changes in many members brenna, to name one. She's a sweet girl who simply is as not afraid of voicing her opinions as me. But she has changed how she delivers it in most regards. Would it be lasting? Could some a-hole push her buttons to the point where she comes back with some snappy comeback? I don't know. But I'm willing to leave the past in its rightful place.

Jar, our own lovable, cantankerous soul has also come a long way in my opinion. He and I speak amicably now, despite not still agreeing on many things. As a result, he no longer seeks to find ways to irritate me.

Since NWR's return, he and I have not quarreled even once. Same with Omni. I largely attribute that to sessions in chat, where we really got to know each other.

The list goes on.

Then of course there is the matter of people, such as iceage, that did not seem to warrant any suspension whatsoever.

And the rest, well, they just stood with their buddies. Even the always sweet Purple Dawn has jumped ship. That's got to say a lot.

AdminNosy, Adminnemooseus and myself still have details to work out regarding moderation

I hope this trio can work it out. I still think you need more.

EvC Forum exists to provide a venue for productive discussion between evolutionists and creationists through moderated discussion threads. Those who make this difficult will not be permitted to remain here. I don't think it is asking too much for members to embrace the raison d'être of EvC Forum and not hinder achievement of our primary goal of allowing the two sides to better understand one another through communication in a dispassionate environment.

This debate will never be dispassionate. We're human beings with thoughts and emotions. I mean, I certainly agree that we all need to keep our composure, but its going to get heated even still.

Any gathering of people develops a sense of community, and this turns out to be as true of the virtual communities of the on-line world as anywhere real. It's always sad when a community loses someone

That's really the heart of the issue right now for me. But you have a forum to run. I respect your decision, but I hope that you would still reconsider.


“There is something which unites magic and applied science while separating both from the 'wisdom' of earlier ages. For the wise men of old the cardinal problem had been how to conform the soul to objective reality, and the solution had been knowledge, self-discipline, and virtue. For magic and applied science alike the problem is how to subdue reality to the wishes of men: the solution is a technique; and both, in the practice of this technique, are ready to do things hitherto regarded as disgusting and impious" -C.S. Lewis
This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by Admin, posted 01-27-2008 3:17 PM Admin has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 12432
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 124 of 191 (451404)
01-27-2008 4:00 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by randman
01-27-2008 3:45 PM


Re: maybe it's not clear to you?
quote:

Never said, nor implied that. You are the one that stated creationist moderators were there to moderate creationists to avoid an appearance of bias.

You (wrongly) interpreted my comment that they should be moderating creationists as meaning that they should only moderate creationists. Why is it wrong then to take your comment that they should moderate evolutionists as meaning that they should only moderate evolutionists ?

The rest of your post simply does not connect to what I've been saying. Apparently you still think that I am suggesting that creationist moderators should be placed in an inferior role. I made no such suggestion.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by randman, posted 01-27-2008 3:45 PM randman has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5512
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006


Message 125 of 191 (451405)
01-27-2008 4:00 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by Admin
01-27-2008 3:53 PM


Re: Brief Answers
Nothing is forever. Let us see how things go for a little while before I give the question more consideration.

Fair enough. I can handle that for the time being.

Thank you for responding. (I had my finger on the self-destruct button :D)


“There is something which unites magic and applied science while separating both from the 'wisdom' of earlier ages. For the wise men of old the cardinal problem had been how to conform the soul to objective reality, and the solution had been knowledge, self-discipline, and virtue. For magic and applied science alike the problem is how to subdue reality to the wishes of men: the solution is a technique; and both, in the practice of this technique, are ready to do things hitherto regarded as disgusting and impious" -C.S. Lewis
This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Admin, posted 01-27-2008 3:53 PM Admin has not yet responded

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 2247 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 126 of 191 (451407)
01-27-2008 4:04 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by Buzsaw
01-27-2008 12:06 PM


Re: suggesting considering this is debate site
I share the same concerns over Ned to be frank, but then again, I haven't been back very long so maybe shouldn't comment.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Buzsaw, posted 01-27-2008 12:06 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 2939 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 127 of 191 (451431)
01-27-2008 5:22 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by PaulK
01-27-2008 12:20 PM


Re: suggesting considering this is debate site
Not sure if NosyNed is capable of being unbiased in moderating evolutionists or creationists.

If creationists are to moderate creationists and the evolutionists moderate evolutionists then Percy not Ned should moderate the moderators.

P.S. If a creationist moderator has to fear the wrath of ned then how pray tell would any creationists want to come here to debate!!!!!!!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by PaulK, posted 01-27-2008 12:20 PM PaulK has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by molbiogirl, posted 01-28-2008 3:20 PM johnfolton has not yet responded

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 81 days)
Posts: 9068
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 128 of 191 (451704)
01-28-2008 2:25 PM


banned from chat, too?
i hear the people banned from the site can no longer participate in chat?

why?

Edited by arachnophilia, : No reason given.


אָרַח

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by nator, posted 01-28-2008 6:14 PM arachnophilia has not yet responded

molbiogirl
Member
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 129 of 191 (451718)
01-28-2008 3:20 PM
Reply to: Message 127 by johnfolton
01-27-2008 5:22 PM


Re: suggesting considering this is debate site
I find Ned to be even handed and fair to all.

I am sooooo glad he's a mod.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by johnfolton, posted 01-27-2008 5:22 PM johnfolton has not yet responded

Dan Carroll 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1914 days)
Posts: 2904
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 130 of 191 (451733)
01-28-2008 4:04 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Admin
01-24-2008 2:50 PM


Hey, guys! Just thought I'd pop back in and check if some tempers have cooled, and...

Well, damn.

Okay. Just stopping in long enough to throw this out there, then.

Percy six months ago writes:

Do you follow the NFL at all? If so, you might know that the NFL rules are formulated so that referees never have to make judgment calls. A player either violated a rule or he didn't, but his intent is never an issue. Hence, a "roughing the quarterback" call does not depend upon whether it was intentional or not, only on whether it happened or not. Similarly, a face mask violation is strictly a function of whether the face mask was touched (minor penalty, 5 yards and a 1st down) or grasped (major penalty, 15 yards and a 1st down). Intention to rough the quarterback or grab the face mask is never a factor in making the call.

As the Forum Guidelines have evolved over the years we've tried to keep this in mind. As much as possible we want to avoid making forum guideline enforcement a judgment call. I don't think we've done anywhere near as well as the NFL in this, but that is our goal, to never make judging a member's intent part of the assessment.

Percy now writes:

I'm only issuing indefinite suspensions to members who specifically request it, or who indicate by the nature of a reply that they would be a divisive presence in moving forward.

It is, of course, your house Percy, and your rules. You can do what you please. But if what you please is inexplicably staggering hypocrisy, then... wow. Have fun with that, big guy. Don't think I'll bother checking back in another six months.

And seriously, if anyone can find any language whatsoever in the following text that indicates a "divisive presence," please feel free to e-mail me. I wish to put your downright superhuman ability to make nigh-on psychic judgement calls... calls that see past mere "actions that actually happened in reality" to some effective use. There's gotta be a way to make some serious money off it.

quote:
i understand your concerns with what's been going on here lately, and i think that you might have a point with the singular moderation. but. i don't think you're being reasonable banning people at random for the same kind of snide comments you yourself tend to participate in.

i really do appreciate your concerns. but i think whatever you're upset about is really doing more to you than you want it to. i'm not out here to lose my own license, just to tell you that maybe you should relax a little. email me or something. lets talk.



"I know some of you are going to say 'I did look it up, and that's not true.' That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut."
-Stephen Colbert
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Admin, posted 01-24-2008 2:50 PM Admin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by Admin, posted 01-28-2008 4:23 PM Dan Carroll has not yet responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12389
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 131 of 191 (451744)
01-28-2008 4:23 PM
Reply to: Message 130 by Dan Carroll
01-28-2008 4:04 PM


Yours is a pretty good example of a post indicating that you'd probably be a divisive force in moving forward. EvC Forum is for discussion and debate on topics related to the creation/evolution controversy. If that's what you'd like to do, then welcome aboard, that's what this site is for. But the moderators who work so hard to make this site work are not here for members to abuse, which is what had become far too commonplace.

No need to check in every six months with an attitude like yours.

Edited by Admin, : Grammar.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by Dan Carroll, posted 01-28-2008 4:04 PM Dan Carroll has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by nator, posted 01-28-2008 6:18 PM Admin has not yet responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 1990 days)
Posts: 12961
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 132 of 191 (451812)
01-28-2008 6:14 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by arachnophilia
01-28-2008 2:25 PM


oh sure, I can already see the quality improvement
Jesus, we lose Ringo and nwr but randman now has full posting privilages.

Wow, the quality of debate is simply bound to improve.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by arachnophilia, posted 01-28-2008 2:25 PM arachnophilia has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by randman, posted 01-28-2008 6:25 PM nator has responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 1990 days)
Posts: 12961
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 133 of 191 (451816)
01-28-2008 6:18 PM
Reply to: Message 131 by Admin
01-28-2008 4:23 PM


So Dan is too threatening, now? He's on the list of undesireables?

Gee, is the fact that I am still unhappy with the pogrom you have enacted make my days here numbered too, percy?

Should I be watching what I say?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by Admin, posted 01-28-2008 4:23 PM Admin has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by Hyroglyphx, posted 01-28-2008 7:13 PM nator has responded
 Message 138 by Buzsaw, posted 01-28-2008 8:31 PM nator has not yet responded

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 2247 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 134 of 191 (451818)
01-28-2008 6:25 PM
Reply to: Message 132 by nator
01-28-2008 6:14 PM


Re: oh sure, I can already see the quality improvement
We could just ban all the creationists and IDers or maybe except a handful? Is that better?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by nator, posted 01-28-2008 6:14 PM nator has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by Wounded King, posted 01-28-2008 6:28 PM randman has not yet responded
 Message 148 by nator, posted 01-29-2008 7:38 AM randman has not yet responded

Wounded King
Member (Idle past 1443 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 135 of 191 (451819)
01-28-2008 6:28 PM
Reply to: Message 134 by randman
01-28-2008 6:25 PM


Must have slipped my mind
Didn't we do that already?

I'm sure it was on my 'to do' list.

TTFN,

WK


This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by randman, posted 01-28-2008 6:25 PM randman has not yet responded

  
Prev1
...
78
9
10111213Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017