Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 108 (8739 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-30-2017 10:15 PM
397 online now:
CRR, Davidjay, edge, Faith, jar, LamarkNewAge, ThinAirDesigns (7 members, 390 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jayhawker Soule
Post Volume:
Total: 805,896 Year: 10,502/21,208 Month: 3,589/2,674 Week: 132/873 Day: 132/76 Hour: 1/7

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev123456
7
8Next
Author Topic:   Thread Reopen Requests 2
Admin
Director
Posts: 12439
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 91 of 116 (604191)
02-10-2011 1:34 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by jar
02-10-2011 12:27 PM


Re: Could the thread Did the Biblical Exodus ever happen? be reopened
Sure, and I'll leave it open so Buz can give it another try.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by jar, posted 02-10-2011 12:27 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by jar, posted 02-10-2011 2:03 PM Admin has acknowledged this reply

    
jar
Member
Posts: 28702
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 92 of 116 (604208)
02-10-2011 2:03 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by Admin
02-10-2011 1:34 PM


Re: Could the thread Did the Biblical Exodus ever happen? be reopened
Thanks sir.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Admin, posted 02-10-2011 1:34 PM Admin has acknowledged this reply

  
New Cat's Eye
Member
Posts: 11253
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 93 of 116 (622746)
07-06-2011 9:55 AM


Permissions
May I please have the necessary permissions to participate in the Intelligent Design forum?

Are there any other forums that I've lost permissions to participate in?


Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by Admin, posted 07-06-2011 12:38 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12439
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 94 of 116 (622779)
07-06-2011 12:38 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by New Cat's Eye
07-06-2011 9:55 AM


Re: Permissions
Catholic Scientist in various posts from the "Who designed the ID designer(s)?" thread in the Intelligent Design forum over 2 days beginning June 29 writes:

You're such an idiot.

Not when they're idiots like you.

Nuh-uh!

That doesn't follow at all, stupid.

Boo-fucking-hoo. Cry me a river. You gonna go home and eat some baby food, crybaby?

I do it all the time. I already explained to you that its your stupid idiocy that requires me making fun of you in order to have any desire to reply.

I've disagreed with tons of people without thinking they're stupid idiots... except for the ones who are stupid idiots.

From the Forum Guidelines:

  1. Always treat other members with respect. Argue the position, not the person. Avoid abusive, harassing and invasive behavior. Avoid needling, hectoring and goading tactics.

Adminnemooseus posted a general note to the forum expressing concern before your last few messages, and you ignored it.

Restoring your or Theodoric's posting permissions in the Intelligent Design forum does not appear warranted.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-06-2011 9:55 AM New Cat's Eye has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-06-2011 12:45 PM Admin has responded

    
New Cat's Eye
Member
Posts: 11253
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 95 of 116 (622780)
07-06-2011 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by Admin
07-06-2011 12:38 PM


Re: Permissions
It wasn't the Intelligent Design forum that brought the worst out of me, it was the member I was responding to...

Out of curiosity, are you capable of limiting the permission of who people can reply to?

I don't see how limiting my participation in just one of the many forums helps enforce the rule.

I just want to reply to RAZD in the Who designed the ID designer(s)? thread.

abe

All of those insults were before the warning, and the last one I didn't mean to insult him personally.

Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Admin, posted 07-06-2011 12:38 PM Admin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by Admin, posted 07-06-2011 2:30 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12439
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 96 of 116 (622794)
07-06-2011 2:30 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by New Cat's Eye
07-06-2011 12:45 PM


Re: Permissions
Catholic Scientist writes:

I don't see how limiting my participation in just one of the many forums helps enforce the rule.

It depends upon whether it acts as a reminder about the Forum Guidelines for you. Moderators prefer to use minimal enforcement, but figuring out what's minimal but sufficient for each individual is hit-or-miss. You have an, uh, exuberant style at times, sometimes reminiscent of Mike the Wiz when he's on a roll.

I'll restore both your and Theodoric's permissions, we'll assume this won't happen again and you don't have to stay out of the Why are there no human apes alive today? thread.

Out of curiosity, are you capable of limiting the permission of who people can reply to?

Not at present, but this is on the todo list, as is limiting participation by thread instead of by entire forums.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-06-2011 12:45 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-06-2011 2:36 PM Admin has acknowledged this reply

    
New Cat's Eye
Member
Posts: 11253
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 97 of 116 (622795)
07-06-2011 2:36 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Admin
07-06-2011 2:30 PM


Re: Permissions
Thanks Percy. I'll work on being nicer or just avoid responding when I can't.

Out of curiosity, are you capable of limiting the permission of who people can reply to?

Not at present, but this is on the todo list, as is limiting participation by thread instead of by entire forums.

A member blacklist would be cool too.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Admin, posted 07-06-2011 2:30 PM Admin has acknowledged this reply

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 98 of 116 (630142)
08-22-2011 5:44 PM


Prophecy vs Freewill
Reference, the Prophecy vs freewill.

We/They do tend to get side racked, but I believe I can keep it on track with IMJ and Butterfly as I was attempting in my last post to IMJ. i also encouraged them both to stay on topic because I knew the hammer was fixing to fall.

Request it be reopened due to the fact that there is much information to be covered in that connection

Thanks,

Dawn Bertot


Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by Jon, posted 08-22-2011 6:28 PM Dawn Bertot has responded

    
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 99 of 116 (630148)
08-22-2011 6:28 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Dawn Bertot
08-22-2011 5:44 PM


Re: Prophecy vs Freewill
That thread hasn't been on topic since about five posts in, with you, IMJ, and Butterfly largely to blame for the derailing.

Jon


Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Dawn Bertot, posted 08-22-2011 5:44 PM Dawn Bertot has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by Dawn Bertot, posted 08-22-2011 10:22 PM Jon has not yet responded

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 100 of 116 (630198)
08-22-2011 10:22 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by Jon
08-22-2011 6:28 PM


Re: Prophecy vs Freewill
That thread hasn't been on topic since about five posts in, with you, IMJ, and Butterfly largely to blame for the derailing.
Jon

Wrong, I have tried to maintain a semblance of the thread while addressing those other issues

D Bertot


This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Jon, posted 08-22-2011 6:28 PM Jon has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by AdminPD, posted 08-23-2011 5:56 AM Dawn Bertot has not yet responded

    
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 101 of 116 (630200)
08-22-2011 10:46 PM


Myself and Butterfly, AKA, mallethead, would like to use the following and our final summations in the Kent hovind thread to reopen it or start a new one concerning, debate tactics used by both sides

I have suggested to Butterfly the Title 'Debate styles and tactics used by Creationist and Evolutionist

Thanks for you consideration in advance

D Bertot

Butterfly writes

Science and evidence have definitions. All words have definitions. The standard definition of words like science, evidence, theory, supernatural, logic etc apply to everyone. Making up your own incorrect definition to a word does not improve your arguement, it just makes it confusing.

Just taking Dawns summation as a source of an example, there is obvious misrepresentation or total incorrect usage of the following words and phrases : evidence, science, secular fundamental humanist, apologetics, scientific method, natural causes (I personaly have written an extensive reply to Dawn illustrating how to correctly use the term). This sort of thing is relatively common amongst creationist debaters.

Another tactic often used is to misinterpret or misrepresent facts in order to confuse the argument. For example, using Dawn again because he is such a good source of poor arguements.

When refering to the TOE, however, they insist thier is direct evidence, even if, like creationism,no one actually wittnessed that event. They change the nature of the word evidence to suit thier purposes and demand and insist that we provide what they are not required to establish the position as valid

There are two examples of common, dishonest arguement here. There is misrepresentation of the ToE. This sentence suggests that evolution is not currently occuring. Even Dawn must know that this is not true. But this is an example used by many creationists, not just Dawn Bertot. I am only using this as an example as it is handy. This can only be deliberate dishonesty in order to further his own cause. He also suggests that followers of the ToE are changing the word evidence to further their cause when this is also not true.

Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by Panda, posted 08-23-2011 5:39 AM Dawn Bertot has not yet responded

    
Panda
Member (Idle past 1099 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 102 of 116 (630226)
08-23-2011 5:39 AM
Reply to: Message 101 by Dawn Bertot
08-22-2011 10:46 PM


Dawn Bertot writes:

Myself and Butterfly, AKA, mallethead, would like to use the following and our final summations in the Kent hovind thread to reopen it or start a new one concerning, debate tactics used by both sides


It seems that you are unable to even make a single post that does not contain insulting and inflammatory language.

That alone is enough to answer the question about your (and other creationists) debate tactics and should be a clear indication of your future behaviour in the thread you are requesting to be re-opened.


Always remember: Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur

Science flies you into space; religion flies you into buildings.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by Dawn Bertot, posted 08-22-2011 10:46 PM Dawn Bertot has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by AdminPD, posted 08-23-2011 7:25 AM Panda has acknowledged this reply

  
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 103 of 116 (630228)
08-23-2011 5:56 AM
Reply to: Message 100 by Dawn Bertot
08-22-2011 10:22 PM


Re: Prophecy vs Freewill
Yes, you did try to get the thread back on track. Thank you for that attempt.

Buterflytyrant started the snowball.

I will reopen the thread. Try to keep it on track since Frako doesn't seem to be taking care of his thread.

AdminPD


This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Dawn Bertot, posted 08-22-2011 10:22 PM Dawn Bertot has not yet responded

  
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 104 of 116 (630236)
08-23-2011 7:25 AM
Reply to: Message 102 by Panda
08-23-2011 5:39 AM


Request, Not Commentary
To those not making a request.

This thread is for requests only. Unless you are making a request, you should not be participating in this thread.

Commentaries aren't needed.

Thanks
AdminPD


This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Panda, posted 08-23-2011 5:39 AM Panda has acknowledged this reply

  
Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3768
Joined: 09-26-2002
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 105 of 116 (633709)
09-15-2011 6:19 PM


Potential Evidence for a Global Flood
Just Being Real posted here:

Why was the "Potential Evidence for a Global Flood" thread locked off again exactly? It's interesting that I was preparing to respond on it and then it was locked for "bogus messages about to be posted." Was it for my benefit? Or am I just reading too much into this?

My "topic closing temporarily" message:

Temporary topic closure because of bogus messages coming in about 15 minutes.

Damn, I'm good. Shut that sucker down just in time.

Normally I do comma overkill. The above sentence really needed a couple of commas. It should have been:

Temporary topic closure, because of bogus messages, coming in about 15 minutes.

I'll now reopen the topic. Please, quality messages, not snark.

Adminnemooseus


Please be familiar with the various topics and other links in the "Essential Links", found in the top of the page menu. Amongst other things, this is where to find where to report various forum problems.

    
Prev123456
7
8Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017