General discussion of moderation procedures - Part οκτώ

I just posted the Message 19, and it felt important to me to make some additional comments related to site activity.It must be kept in mind that activity levels can be subject to fluctuations unrelated to anything the site is doing, but I am nonetheless heartened to see the resumption of increases in site activity. As you'll see, activity levels continued to pick up in November, but that's not what I want to talk about.November was a busy month in other ways, too. Early November saw the departure of Faith over philosophical differences, and with her Iano. Late November witnessed a major blow-up over yet other philosophical differences and resulted in the departure of Jar, Nwr, Omni and Ringo. All these people made significant contributions to EvC Forum and will be dearly missed, indeed, are already dearly missed.If the increase in activity level continues it must be understood that this in no way indicates that those who left were wrong and made this a better place by leaving. What it tells us is that a house divided against itself cannot stand. My own interpretation is that internal tensions created by legitimate differences over policy were having a negative impact. The people who left could probably go off and create their own successful site, perhaps even more successful than this one. But it simply wasn't possible for two opposing philosophical positions on the best way to approach the creation/evolution debate to exist at a single site.If I were to try to characterize those differences I would say that it is one of elitist versus populist. The word elitist usually carries negative connotations, but honesty and fairness requires that I characterize my philosophical position on the debate using terms that opponents to my approach would use: elitist. My approach is elitist.But naturally I'm going to characterize elitist in the most positive terms possible. By elitist I do not mean exclusive. By elitist I mean that I want to promote excellence in debate. That doesn't mean that everyone who comes here has to be an excellent debater. But it does mean that you must strive to do your best, and that means continual improvement. No human being has perfect knowledge or understanding, not Einstein, not Ghandi, not us. If EvC Forum isn't changing you then it is time to move on. If you've been here a year and haven't changed your understanding or approach on at least some things then you don't belong here. This applies to those from both sides of the debate.The tensions here at EvC Forum derived from opposing populist and elitist forces. To me the populist approach involved too large an element of suffering fools gladly. Being elitist does not mean excluding fools, but it does mean excluding those who are saying the same things today that they were saying last year and the year before. I'll say it again: if the debate isn't changing you, then you probably don't belong here.One obvious question is that if I think the debate should change you, then how has it changed me? I probably seem fairly inflexible in viewpoint, so doesn't my resistance to change exclude me by application of my own standard?In my years at EvC Forum I have learned a great deal. Most of it has been on scientific matters, like information theory, genetics, reproduction, the history of biology (I now know far more about Haeckel than I ever wanted to know), thermodynamics, and cosmology. And I think I continue to learn in these areas, as my current dialog with Cavediver indicates. Over the years I have been wrong time and time again, and so clearly I have changed a great deal, because now when I am wrong it is about completely different things.Some of what I have learned is about people. For example, I've learned that you can't correct someone by hurting their feelings. I'm still learning this lesson.And some of what I've learned is about how to keep discussion constructive and rewarding for the participants. Sometimes this means removing individuals from the discussion for the betterment of all involved. And sometimes it means learning that you're walking a fine line and that it is easy to make mistakes while moderating.So let us move forward to make EvC Forum an elitist site in the best sense of the word in that the site is made up of the elite, those who have only the highest goals in mind in wanting only to understand and be understood.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Please reactivate my admin id. Thanks

Done. Your return is a welcome surprise.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

A hearty welcome back, Ned!

Damn, I`m away for a few weeks and the world goes mad. Old stagers quitting in high dudgeon. Bitterness abounding. Major nit-picks. Electronic forests felled. Can it be a massive sun flare influencing human behavior?(coming shortly to a thread near you). I thought regulars were made of stouter stuff than the take-their-marbles-and-walk stuff. As if personal affronts matter to the starving throughout the world. Time to grow up, kiddies, and get back to what EVC does best--providing brilliant and thought-provoking (not necessarily at the same time) threads.Edited by Nighttrain, : Edited to carve up the last sentence.

Just to clarify:I didn't follow the Percy/nwr fracas at all - didn't read any of the thread - and I have little or no idea why jar, nwr and Omni decided to leave. I pulled the plug because of Percy/Admin's comments after the fact, regarding his "vision" for the site.The elitist/populist "division" clearly describes my position: I don't feel that I have anything to contribute to the site as you conceive it.(Not that anything is carved in stone. )Best wishes.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Well, you are as well shutting the site right now because you are never going to achieve this at EvC.The creationist 'champion' old Davidson was locked in a padded cell here because his science and debating style was so sub standard. So, if this is their champion what chance does an averyday creationist have?We have never, at least in my time here, had a creationist that is capable of what you want. Most of them don't understand science or don't know how to support an argument, the others are really nothing but child llike in their responses. What about people who are doing their best and haven't improved at all? Who decides anyway that they aren't fulfilling these conditions? Any idea how many members you would lose if you applied this?You also appear to forget that many members have made a lot of friends here and see this site in a social light as well. It would seem cruel to exclude people from this because they are deemed not to be improving or changing their approach. There's also the fact that some people are not capable of improving. Problem though is that many creationists think they have acheived a high standard but most of it is crap. So the merry-go-round starts again.You explained in admin forum before what your aims for the site were, and they are admirable, but having an open public forum like this won't attract the quality of debater you wish for.I think the admins should slacken off with the over-moderation, it is killing the enjoyment of the site for many.It used to be fun here correcting all the odd balls, I enjoyed many a read over a cup of tea before I became a member here, but now I just feel that the mods are jumping on everyone, the proposed new topics is a pain in the arse, the showcase is an embarrassment, and the site is becoming extremely boring.Mods need to loosen up, scrap the proposed new topics forum, and ditch the showcase. Liven the freakin place up!!Make CK president of EvC!!!Brian.

and that sucks because...you're funny.I understand what Percy is saying about being elite here, but I think it will get dull if we take it too seriously and don't have a few comical posts thrown about. The site will loose character. It won't be as fun. It doesn't need to be so serious.

Don't you think this has already happened?All the good posters have been chased away. I miss Herepton, he was a dedicated debater if a tad insensitive, but at elast he was keen.Same with CK, most of his posts were hilarious, but he has pissed off too!Brian.

Yes, well, I dunno, but...I'm still comming back, so....I guess not Plus, we're always getting new posters so the next forum clown could be right around the corner.I'll judge my opinion of this site by wether or not I continue to visit it. I'm still comming so I must still like it. Is it duller than it once was? I can say 'yes'.Over moderated?....by far!Still cool (in a dorky way)?....yesIt isn't really bad at all.

In a sense I agree with Percy on lifting the standards of EVC in that more 'elite' discussions whet my appetite, taking me into areas and skills that take too much time to research live or on the `net. Battles of the giants, while acerbic at times,shortcut my learning curve. There will always be at least two levels of discussion here with cross-fertilisation when one of the 'elite' comes over to lend their expertise. What initially attracted me to EVC was the infinite patience of our more learned members towards explaining complex subjects to tyros. That influenced my rather short-tempered replies to posters who couldn`t get my drift (a process still under way )
Unfortunately wackos derailed many of the threads with their lack of knowledge and self-control, and determination not to learn. I can understand long-time regulars getting burnt-out with the same inane statements surfacing every few months, to be refuted at length, only to have another of the same ilk arrive who was too lazy to search the archives. I salute those members who put in the hard yards over time and hope the rest gives them an incentive to return. We are a composite of views and approaches which give us the strength of EVC. Losing some of the better posters cuts deep. Like losing a family member. May the reunion take place soon.

I agree that Herepton can be good at debate, but he's very difficult to manage on any board with his gross lack of respect for forum guidelines.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

I completely agree. Sometimes I feel like the mods purposely leave a proposed new topic hanging in limbo for days and days and days. I'd go with Prime Minister CK. Percy can be the queen... king of EvC.

---

Place yourself on the map at http://www.frappr.com/evc

​

The thread about this map can be found here.

In my earlier Message 226 I talked about tensions that existed here concerning requirements for participation. I don't believe I was aware of it while it was happening, but the past couple years have seen a gradual decline in standards. There were a few very visible members who I very much wanted to permanently suspend, but when this was discussed in the admin forum it was argued that it was important that we give these people a voice in order to highlight that such attitudes were out there.My reply was always that it wasn't the position I objected to, but the unconstructive style of participation. The Internet doesn't need EvC Forum to highlight the fact that there are people out there who are stubborn and ignorant irrationalists. I think the general Internet community is already well aware of this. And giving a voice to creationism's most irrational and abusive adherents is the opposite of being fair to creationism, because it paints it in the most negative light possible.I relented concerning permanent suspension on most occasions, but this worked against my desires that EvC Forum be a site where constructive discussion could take place through moderation. Over time I think EvC Forum eventually passed a threshold where the small number of unconstructive participants became too great for much constructive discussion to take place, in part because of their high posting volume.Using a courtroom analogy, in most trials the participants sit quietly at their table, contribute constructively, appropriately and according to courtroom rules, and in general let the trial proceed. But in some very few cases a participant will become so disruptive that he has to be removed in order for the trial to effectively proceed. I think the analogous thing began to happen here more and more often: threads would descend into repetitive nonsense from which no amount of moderation could save them. By not removing primary offenders, constructive discussion became impossible.Some are lamenting the departure of the least rational and constructive members, such as Faith, Herepton and John Davison. They can still participate in the Showcase forum if they wish, where there is no moderation. Or people can discuss with them at other boards. But EvC Forum will not be playing host to those who cannot be constructive contributors to discussion. I created EvC Forum to add value to the creation/evolution debate, not to be just another discussion board where the same discussion could take place anywhere. EvC Forum is intended to be a place where discussions can take place that could not normally occur at other venues. If we're not doing that then we might as well change the name of site to "Just Another Creation/Evolution Discussion Board".So what does constructive discussion mean? I don't want to break it down too finely, so I'll just say that in my mind it means that information is being exchanged, and people are successfully making their views understood to each other. Being constructive in discussion doesn't mean being right, but it does mean following some basic rules of decorum that we all learned in kindergarten, I don't care much for Robert Fulghum's books, but the title of his first book has always rung true to me. Being constructive means being considerate, and it means giving adequate attention to the arguments from the other side. When people who care nothing for such considerations are given free rein, then the debate becomes solely an exercise in patience and restraint for the other side. An exercise that all of us have failed at least once, and some of us many times. Though testing one's patience and restraint is one aspect of debate, the primary purpose is to discuss the topic.My target is not just creationists, by the way. Scott Page is still the poster boy for evolutionist misbehavior. The goal of EvC Forum is balance in the sense that such misbehavior won't be tolerated from either side.There has been some mention of the fact that creationists are sometimes given more leeway than evolutionists. Up until now, this has been true in two different ways. Creationists have been given more leeway regarding the Forum Guidelines as they affect constructive discussion. It is my hope that this form of favored treatment will come to an end.The other way in which creationists have been given more leeway is in tolerating silly and irrational scientific arguments. Since creationists approach the debate with much less of a scientific background than the other side, I believe that leeway in this regard should continue.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

that, and his whole "anything proving evolution is actually disprove".or was that randman? I honestly can't remember.he was really funny, though. (at least, from my side of the fence)

---

Want to help give back to the world community? Did you know that your computer can help? Join the newest TeamEvC Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions for a better tomorrow.