Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 62 (9094 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: d3r31nz1g3
Post Volume: Total: 901,733 Year: 12,845/6,534 Month: 128/2,210 Week: 69/390 Day: 25/44 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 14.0
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 1 of 134 (444497)
12-29-2007 5:05 PM


This is not a debate thread!
This thread is provided for the general membership to present and discuss comments or concerns dealing with moderator procedures/actions or the need for moderator action.
Anyone disrupting this process will lose access to this forum until the situation is resolved.
Admins who have links to the "General Discussion..." topic in their signatures need to change the link.
The previous versions, from first to last:
Change in Moderation?
General discussion of moderation procedures
General discussion of moderation procedures: The Sequel
General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consecution
General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consequtive Consecution
General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consequtive Consecution Sequel
General discussion of moderation procedures - Part 7
General discussion of moderation procedures - Part
General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 9.0
General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 10.0
General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 11.0
General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 12.0
General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 13.0
Edited by AdminPD, : Wording

molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2072 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 2 of 134 (446372)
01-05-2008 11:04 PM


PD
Re: your recent ruling.
Okay, Dubya's cheerleader, what is your plan?
Furthermore, do you believe you are even remotely acting like an adult?
Care to explain your seemingly INSANE position?
From OB, Message 181.
Trash talk?
If not, please define trash talk.

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by arachnophilia, posted 01-06-2008 12:18 AM molbiogirl has replied
 Message 4 by AdminNWR, posted 01-06-2008 12:52 AM molbiogirl has not replied

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 774 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 3 of 134 (446379)
01-06-2008 12:18 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by molbiogirl
01-05-2008 11:04 PM


Re: PD
molbio, my reaction to reading that thread was, "wow, what's gotten into her."
like it or not, there will always be some degree of trash-talk here, and two of those three are pretty much under the radar. but you lost your cool.
try not to let stupid things people say on the internet get to you too much. PD's warning was at both of you, and looks entirely fair to me. it's just a warning to behave, not a suspension.
edit: though it does look like he kept it going...
Edited by arachnophilia, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by molbiogirl, posted 01-05-2008 11:04 PM molbiogirl has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by molbiogirl, posted 01-07-2008 6:59 PM arachnophilia has not replied
 Message 50 by obvious Child, posted 01-08-2008 7:22 PM arachnophilia has replied

AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 134 (446386)
01-06-2008 12:52 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by molbiogirl
01-05-2008 11:04 PM


Re: PD
It is best not to make requests to a specific admin, but to allow any admin to respond. In any case, I responded.
I have suspended obvious Child for 24 hours, consistent with the warning of Message 178.
Had it not been for that specific warning, I would not have given the suspension. It seems to me that there were two people goading each other. However, only one continued after the warning, so the penalty in the warning has been applied.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by molbiogirl, posted 01-05-2008 11:04 PM molbiogirl has not replied

MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5259 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 5 of 134 (446435)
01-06-2008 10:32 AM


Complaint
Dear Admin board,
I would like to make a complaint about AdminModulous who on my opinion is preventing my new topic about descent of testicles to be released. My opinion is that it is due to the fact that my post contradicts neodarwinian explanation of the phenomena and AdminModulous wants to stop it. Is there any unprejudiced institute or board here that could solve the problem of my post? I would like - if possible - to hear also an opinion from an admin who is not a neodarwinist. Thank you. My detained post:
http://EvC Forum: Descent of testicles. -->EvC Forum: Descent of testicles.

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by AdminNosy, posted 01-06-2008 10:47 AM MartinV has replied
 Message 7 by AdminPaul, posted 01-06-2008 10:54 AM MartinV has replied
 Message 8 by sinequanon, posted 01-06-2008 10:54 AM MartinV has replied
 Message 19 by macaroniandcheese, posted 01-06-2008 6:27 PM MartinV has not replied

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


Message 6 of 134 (446438)
01-06-2008 10:47 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by MartinV
01-06-2008 10:32 AM


Standard Procedure
I read your post and AM's responses. He is simply asking you to flesh your OP out. This is standard operating procedure. If you are unwilling to work on your OP why should anyone think you will be willing to put a good effort into the discussion itself.
The requests are not terribly onerous. If this is such an important point why are you not willing to flesh the OP out with material that will be needed early on in the discussion anyway? It will just save a bit of time and stop using up some of the 300 posts getting to the point.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by MartinV, posted 01-06-2008 10:32 AM MartinV has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by MartinV, posted 01-06-2008 12:46 PM AdminNosy has not replied

AdminPaul
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 134 (446440)
01-06-2008 10:54 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by MartinV
01-06-2008 10:32 AM


Re: Complaint
I have read the exchange of posts, and also the original blog argument.
In my opinion AdminModulus was too generous. Your argument is inadequately developed and as it stands does not constitute a valid challenge to accepted ideas. More work is required before I would consider it for promotion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by MartinV, posted 01-06-2008 10:32 AM MartinV has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by MartinV, posted 01-06-2008 12:50 PM AdminPaul has replied

sinequanon
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 331
Joined: 12-17-2007


Message 8 of 134 (446441)
01-06-2008 10:54 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by MartinV
01-06-2008 10:32 AM


Re: Complaint
Please, somebody, promote this NPT. It is very interesting, even for people like me who would not be able to comment.
MartinV, wasn't AdminModulous finally ready to accept the opening post,(OP) with a couple of citations supporting 1) and 2)?
I think the confusion with the translation from German was a simple misunderstanding.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by MartinV, posted 01-06-2008 10:32 AM MartinV has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by MartinV, posted 01-06-2008 12:57 PM sinequanon has not replied

MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5259 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 9 of 134 (446468)
01-06-2008 12:46 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by AdminNosy
01-06-2008 10:47 AM


Re: Standard Procedure
I think that Modulous knows very well that I will defend my opinion in open discussion. You know it too. At the discussion about mimicry I used arguments from many prominent antidarwinian sources that have never been transalted into English and you never heard about them.
I suppose it was you who forced me to rewrite OP about "German idealistic morphology" several times and there were no discussion to the topic afterwards.
I addresed my critic to your post also here:
http://EvC Forum: Descent of testicles. -->EvC Forum: Descent of testicles.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by AdminNosy, posted 01-06-2008 10:47 AM AdminNosy has not replied

MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5259 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 10 of 134 (446470)
01-06-2008 12:50 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by AdminPaul
01-06-2008 10:54 AM


Re: Complaint
Have I to copy&paste sentences from doctor Myers article? And then I should translate passages from Adolf Portmanns "Dualitat der Geschlechter"? But I think it is against EvC rules. We should use here our own words, not copy/paste/translate, or am I wrong?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by AdminPaul, posted 01-06-2008 10:54 AM AdminPaul has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by AdminPaul, posted 01-06-2008 1:15 PM MartinV has replied

MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5259 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 11 of 134 (446473)
01-06-2008 12:57 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by sinequanon
01-06-2008 10:54 AM


Re: Complaint
Thank you for your support. I am fed up with neodarwinian admins here. They promote their neodarwinian stuff without hesitation. Or when you ask some stupid question a la 15 years old creationist they will open new thread immediately to show how stupid creationists are.
In the case they have no answer they will chicane you. The forum is obviously biased. I haven't read an admin opinion "Hello VMartin, I am admin and ID proponent, I think Behe and Davison are right, but I think that Modulous is right too and your post should be rewritten".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by sinequanon, posted 01-06-2008 10:54 AM sinequanon has not replied

AdminPaul
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 134 (446479)
01-06-2008 1:15 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by MartinV
01-06-2008 12:50 PM


Re: Complaint
There is no rule against quoting - only a rule about relying on quotes to make your argument (rather than providing supporting evidence).
Since the problem is that your argument has not been adequately made, further quotes would not address the issue. And in fact the blog entry does not provide support for your argument - indeed it raises difficulties which it would be good to address in your OP.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by MartinV, posted 01-06-2008 12:50 PM MartinV has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by MartinV, posted 01-06-2008 1:30 PM AdminPaul has replied

MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5259 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 13 of 134 (446483)
01-06-2008 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by AdminPaul
01-06-2008 1:15 PM


Re: Complaint
And in fact the blog entry does not provide support for your argument - indeed it raises difficulties which it would be good to address in your OP.
I didn't claim it supports my argument. I claimed neodarwinism has no plausible explanation of the phenomena. Thats all. I don't need to address all neodarwinian explanation of phenomena, because dr. Myers have already done it in "the blog". All I needed was to address is the old "cooling spermatozoa" explanation. Do you think that arguments like:
1) moving testicles outside body is very dangerous solution for species
2) many mammalian species do not need to cool their spermatozoa
3) birds with much more higher temperature as mammals do not cool their spermatozoa either
4) darwinists themselves admit that "cooling spermatozoa" explanation is - I quote the research - untestable!!!
are not sufficient arguments for opening a thread for further discussion? What other arguments you would like me to bring?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by AdminPaul, posted 01-06-2008 1:15 PM AdminPaul has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by AdminPaul, posted 01-06-2008 1:58 PM MartinV has replied

AdminPaul
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 134 (446489)
01-06-2008 1:58 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by MartinV
01-06-2008 1:30 PM


Re: Complaint
In the light of the information given in the blog post, I would like you to show that your points 2 and 3 have any relevance. At present you have offered no reason to think that they have. Testability is important but it does not impact the plausibility of the explanation, thus your point 4 is moot. And your first point - the only one left - is not sufficient as it stands to carry your argument.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by MartinV, posted 01-06-2008 1:30 PM MartinV has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by MartinV, posted 01-06-2008 2:28 PM AdminPaul has replied

MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5259 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 15 of 134 (446504)
01-06-2008 2:28 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by AdminPaul
01-06-2008 1:58 PM


Re: Complaint
The points 2) and 3) are very clear and easy to underestand. I really don't know how is it possible that they have no relevance on your opinion. Obviously spermatozoa could survive also in environment with higher temperature if they are forced to do so by environment. If testicles are outside the body then spermatozoa adapted to lower temperature and probably higher temperature would kill them - but I don't know. For instance many female species with hidden gravitidy - roe for instatnce - keep males spermatozoa inside their bodies several months before fertilization. For instance they mate in september but fertilization with spared sperms take effect at november or december. I don't know if sperms of deers are cooled inside roes, but I doubt about it. So this is the another argument for open discussion, don't you think so?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by AdminPaul, posted 01-06-2008 1:58 PM AdminPaul has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by AdminPaul, posted 01-06-2008 2:40 PM MartinV has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2022 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022