Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 79 (8965 total)
46 online now:
anglagard, PaulK (2 members, 44 visitors)
Newest Member: javier martinez
Post Volume: Total: 873,198 Year: 4,946/23,288 Month: 67/1,784 Week: 165/353 Day: 6/39 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General discussion of moderation procedures
Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3915
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 1 of 304 (168254)
12-14-2004 7:04 PM


The Change in Moderation? topic, which is the traditional home of general discussion of moderation issues, is close to 300 messages. It will soon be closed, as are all topics when they reach the 300 message vacinity.

This topic will replace it.

Admins such a myself, who include a link to the "Change in Moderation?" topic in their "signature", will need to change that to link to this new topic.

Adminnemooseus

{Edit 5/5/05 - Changed link to link to page 1. I had been set up to link to page 6. - Adminnemooseus}

This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 05-05-2005 01:08 AM

Shorten name of thread, prior name no longer needs to be included.

This message has been edited by Admin, 05-09-2005 11:47 AM


New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum

Other useful links:

Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by berberry, posted 12-14-2004 7:14 PM Adminnemooseus has responded

berberry
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 304 (168257)
12-14-2004 7:14 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Adminnemooseus
12-14-2004 7:04 PM


In Praise of Creo Moderators
When the forum started to add creo moderators a few weeks ago I was worried that there might be problems. Having visited and, in rare instances, posted on Christian message boards, I suspected that some of the new mods would be overly sensitive to challenges to the Bible and Christian theology. However, my fear seems to have been misplaced as these new moderators have shown remarkable restaint. It seems to me that the boards are progressing much as they were before, and I think this fact speaks well of our cyber community.

I'm so exceedingly opposed to most of what the creos stand for that I rarely find any opportunity to praise them for anything. In the case of these new moderators I think a bit of praise is in order and I think this thread might be the appropriate place to offer it.


Dog is my copilot.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-14-2004 7:04 PM Adminnemooseus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-14-2004 7:31 PM berberry has not yet responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3915
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 3 of 304 (168263)
12-14-2004 7:31 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by berberry
12-14-2004 7:14 PM


Re: In Praise of Creo Moderators
All their messages have to pass through the "Proposed Creationist Moderator Postings" topic in the "Private Administrative Forum".

Adminnemooseus

PS: Just kidding


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by berberry, posted 12-14-2004 7:14 PM berberry has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by CK, posted 12-18-2004 10:33 AM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded

CK
Member (Idle past 2582 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 4 of 304 (169705)
12-18-2004 10:33 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Adminnemooseus
12-14-2004 7:31 PM


My dell thread.
I can 100% see what you closed my dell thread down in the coffee house but I'm pretty sure that "this could have gone in one of the humour threads" and then a close would have been sufficent.

I'm not sure what purpose your denigration serves.

This message has been edited by Charles Knight, 12-18-2004 10:34 AM

{Added by edit: The referenced topic is here. - Adminnemooseus}

This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 12-18-2004 11:05 AM

This message has been edited by Admin, 01-13-2005 09:50 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-14-2004 7:31 PM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded

Silent H
Member (Idle past 4274 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 5 of 304 (176504)
01-13-2005 9:14 AM


shut down of controversial topic
I was highly disappointed to see the closing of a thread before it even began. Although it was on a controversial topic which at this point in time is so taboo (esp to Americans) that it would generate a lot of emotions, I saw no real reason given for its closure.

The idea that it is any further away from EvC content than harm in homosexuality or the Iraq War or pining for the recent death of a comic book artist, is extremely insulting to the intellect.

It also suggests a somewhat spineless approach to topics. It would seem then that if this were the 50's we couldn't be discussing communism or homosexuality. If it were the 1850's we couldn't be discussing slavery. If it were the 1660's we couldn't be discussing witchcraft, and around that same time and earlier I suppose we shouldn't even be discussing EvC!

The fact is that I look at EvC as a place where topics can be addressed, including controversial ones. The point being to try and shed some light on subjects through discussion and appealing to logic and evidence. Shaz did not open up with an emotional broadside, but rather tried to keep it strict and clinical. As long as it stayed that way what would have been the problem.

It was said that it must be decided if this discussion will be allowed. I do wonder at who is to be doing the deciding.

If you decide that it will somehow cast a shadow over the site, or attract attention to it that is unwanted (people coming here for that debate rather than EvC) then so be it. Just let's not insult people by trying to white wash what is really going on. That topic is going to be censored unlike any other topic, simply because society is so disturbed about that issue that it cannot be allowed to be discussed openly.

This message has been edited by holmes, 01-13-2005 09:15 AM


holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

"Don't believe I'm taken in by stories I have heard, I just read the Daily News and swear by every word.."(Steely Dan)


Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by AdminNosy, posted 01-13-2005 10:55 AM Silent H has not yet responded
 Message 7 by AdminJar, posted 01-13-2005 11:02 AM Silent H has not yet responded

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


Message 6 of 304 (176524)
01-13-2005 10:55 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Silent H
01-13-2005 9:14 AM


Re: shut down of controversial topic
Jar considered it closed temporarily while he asked for advice. We'll see what the consensus is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Silent H, posted 01-13-2005 9:14 AM Silent H has not yet responded

AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 304 (176526)
01-13-2005 11:02 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Silent H
01-13-2005 9:14 AM


Re: shut down of controversial topic
Actually, given the advice so far I opened the thread with a request to keep it civil and on topic.


New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum

Other useful links:

Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Silent H, posted 01-13-2005 9:14 AM Silent H has not yet responded

Gary
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 304 (181719)
01-29-2005 7:51 PM


Are we being too hard on people who ask uninformed questions?
The subtitle on this forum is "Knowledge and Understanding through Discussion." However, I am seeing more and more people propose topics that show great ignorance of the theory of evolution but a willingness to learn and ask questions. These topics generally don't get moved to the regular forums, and I feel that the newbies who post these threads might leave the forum without learning anything. They are simply told that they have a lot of misconceptions, that they are posting something that was already discussed, or that they are thinking about too many things at once.

I worry that maybe people will come here, try to post a thread, and then leave insulted believing that the evil evolutionists don't want to tell them anything or don't want to hear their viewpoint. Therefore, I propose that a new forum be created, in which threads that might be repeats or show misconceptions can be discussed. People might be able to learn more about their own viewpoints and opposing viewpoints that way.

Here’s an example: www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=25&t=500&m=1 -->www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=25&t=500&m=1">http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=25&t=500&m=1

This one probably wouldn’t make the greatest thread ever, but I’m sure plenty of people here would be happy to answer his questions, or at least give more information about the evolution of the animals he asks about. There should be a place where this can be done.

Another example: www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=25&t=550&m=1 -->www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=25&t=550&m=1">http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=25&t=550&m=1

This poster is obviously not the best at putting his thoughts into words, but he gets his point across. He’s trying to ask about all these things, but he doesn’t really get an answer. I don’t think that ignoring peoples’ questions fosters any useful thinking.

I do feel that the moderators here do an excellent job of keeping threads on topic and encouraging discussion in threads that do get promoted. Also, I have seen them show great patience with people that I myself probably wouldn’t put up with, were I in their position. They deserve praise for that.


Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Quetzal, posted 01-30-2005 11:11 AM Gary has not yet responded
 Message 11 by AdminJar, posted 01-30-2005 11:47 AM Gary has not yet responded
 Message 12 by Brad McFall, posted 01-30-2005 12:32 PM Gary has responded

Quetzal
Member (Idle past 4326 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 9 of 304 (181814)
01-30-2005 11:11 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Gary
01-29-2005 7:51 PM


Re: Are we being too hard on people who ask uninformed questions?
Gary, I agree with you in the main. Especially in reference to your first link, the quibble that has held up promotion seems to be rather trivial. I disagree that the second link you provided represents a topic that should have been promoted, however. It is literally incomprehensible. Whether the problem was the poster's ability with English or simply with expressing him/herself, there doesn't appear to be any merit in promoting something that is over the borderline gibberish.

In the moderators' defense in both cases, however, I would submit that they have a really difficult task trying to balance the promotion of marginal topics with the generally high quality of this discussion board. This difficulty quite properly leads occasionally to topics that should have been promoted but weren't. On the other hand, there has been little or no obvious reluctance to promote either controversial or contentious topics - rather the opposite. It is mostly a question of writing style and moderator judgement. Mistakes are inevitable, but overall the system has served to keep fairly high-quality.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Gary, posted 01-29-2005 7:51 PM Gary has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by AdminNosy, posted 01-30-2005 11:18 AM Quetzal has responded

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


Message 10 of 304 (181816)
01-30-2005 11:18 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Quetzal
01-30-2005 11:11 AM


Re: Are we being too hard on people who ask uninformed questions?
The reason I won't promote the first referenced post is that the was asked to remove the link but has left it in his signiture.

I didn't take time to peruse the link beyond what comes up but it appears to be unnecessarily anti-religious.

The second one was asked to ask his questions but separately. One thing that is really hard here is to keep a thread on a topic. If a thread is about too many things it decays into several different subthreads going off in different directions. He has too many in one place.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Quetzal, posted 01-30-2005 11:11 AM Quetzal has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Quetzal, posted 01-30-2005 1:39 PM AdminNosy has responded
 Message 74 by Trae, posted 04-11-2005 5:05 AM AdminNosy has not yet responded

AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 304 (181824)
01-30-2005 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Gary
01-29-2005 7:51 PM


Re: Are we being too hard on people who ask uninformed questions?
Gary,

In the two cases you mention, Admins had made suggestions to the posters on changes needed to promote the post.

One of the jobs of Admins is to try to help members make a post that will promote discussion of a specific subject. We also try to keep things balanced and to keep bashing or attacks out of the discussions. (not likely to happen but it's a goal)

In the first one you mentioned I felt that the link was sufficiently controversial that it would likely disrupt the discussion and take over the thread. I told the originator to take the link out and I'd promote the thread. So far the poster has not done so.

I also looked at the second one. Like Ned, I felt that the OP was too disjointed, asked too many vague questions and would not promote a good discussion. But once again, the originator has had suggestions and a chance to edit the OP but has not done so.

I think that you should also understand that while those two have been sitting in PNT, literally dozens of other topics have been approved. The vast majority of topics are approved as originaly proposed and many others are approved when the originator makes suggested changes or explains why such changes are not relevant.

The goal of EvC has always been on the quality of the material as opposed to the quantity. We hope that you find the quality of material here high enough to keep coming back. If you believe that there are PNTs that are worth discussing and that you could modify the unapproved OP, why not propose one yourself giving credit to whoever inspired you? If it is one that would merit promotion, then it will get moved up.


New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum

Other useful links:

Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Gary, posted 01-29-2005 7:51 PM Gary has not yet responded

Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 3487 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 12 of 304 (181837)
01-30-2005 12:32 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Gary
01-29-2005 7:51 PM


Re: Are we being too hard on people who ask uninformed questions?
This may be true, to an extant.

EVC has gotten quite sophisticated over the years. But in truth, if one really wants to stay, it is not hard.

I could for instance support a lot of newer posters but to do so might confuse those who are finally starting to understand what I DO post rather than cheerlead.

Perhaps posters can cut thier teeth somewhere else.

It is clear to me that the evos here really are only expressing what they know but because science is the base of the conversation it is not like other sites. For me this is why I post here even though my own points on cve could be better conveyed in a different setup.

my problem is not that people wont answer my questions, but that they wont read the posts. Reading is not an enemy it is one's friend and if one is afraid to read, there is no reason to be online.

Reading is this one thing. Getting a response is another. The context creation and evolution makes the writing harder than conversation, thus, why simply saying something clearly can go by the boards. Be persistant if you really want to talk. People HERE do respond, you just might need to say it in as many ways as you can imagine.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Gary, posted 01-29-2005 7:51 PM Gary has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Gary, posted 01-30-2005 1:23 PM Brad McFall has responded
 Message 18 by lfen, posted 01-30-2005 2:02 PM Brad McFall has responded

Gary
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 304 (181848)
01-30-2005 1:23 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Brad McFall
01-30-2005 12:32 PM


Re: Are we being too hard on people who ask uninformed questions?
Its not that I think the moderators are doing a bad job at all. This forum runs very smoothly. It isn't me that I am concerned about either, its the other people. I don't think I have a problem getting people to respond when I say something. I just think that a lot of people come here and might not get their questions answered because of a lack of grammar or knowledge about the thing they are asking about.

Rather than just shutting down topics that would normally get thrown away, there could be a Questions and Answers forum where people could ask questions and learn about things without necessarily debating. Maybe the Welcome Visitors forum could be reopened and used for that purpose?

I apologize if I'm backseat moderating, it just seems like there are a lot of forums being retired on the forums list that could be modified rather than closed altogether.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Brad McFall, posted 01-30-2005 12:32 PM Brad McFall has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by AdminJar, posted 01-30-2005 1:30 PM Gary has not yet responded
 Message 15 by AdminNosy, posted 01-30-2005 1:33 PM Gary has not yet responded
 Message 19 by Brad McFall, posted 01-30-2005 5:39 PM Gary has not yet responded
 Message 37 by Phat, posted 03-04-2005 9:42 AM Gary has not yet responded

AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 304 (181850)
01-30-2005 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Gary
01-30-2005 1:23 PM


Re: Are we being too hard on people who ask uninformed questions?
Gary writes:

I apologize if I'm backseat moderating,...

Careful. That's how many of us got in this mess in the first place. ;)

Remember it's better to take one step back when they call for volunteers.


New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum

Other useful links:

Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Gary, posted 01-30-2005 1:23 PM Gary has not yet responded

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


Message 15 of 304 (181851)
01-30-2005 1:33 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Gary
01-30-2005 1:23 PM


Questions and Answers
Rather than just shutting down topics that would normally get thrown away, there could be a Questions and Answers forum where people could ask questions and learn about things without necessarily debating. Maybe the Welcome Visitors forum could be reopened and used for that purpose?

This sounds good but I think the current method can support that. If questions are sloted into the appropriate fora and handled one topic at a time it is easier for others to come along later.

If someone really is asking question legitamately I think you will find that people answer gently and in good faith. Most are able to over look grammer and spelling and even deep ignorance of the subject.

However it is probably only 1 in 10 that really come asking questions to reduce their ignorance. Most are copying such "questions" web sites and have not intention of listening to answers or learning.

In either case the sloting of questions into the correct place, holding them to one topic and expecting some clarity in the opening post seems to make sense. If you want to try an experiment why not pick up one or two of the questions asked in the second proposal and PNT them separately. See what kind of responses are returned. You can point out that it isn't you asking but is the orignitor.

Maybe then the originator will join in.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Gary, posted 01-30-2005 1:23 PM Gary has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by CK, posted 05-05-2005 5:54 AM AdminNosy has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020