Cranks, Trolls and Other Blessings of the Online World

Oh, I'm with you on this one. You just stuck Six Degrees of Separation in my head, and gave me the chance to take a swipe at you.Now how could I resist that?

---

"Perhaps you should take your furs and your literal interpretations to the other side of the river."
-Anya

Dan, MrHambre (and ?) - in the context of this topic, you are being cranks.Let's get a little more serious, shall we?Adminnemooseus

---

Comments on moderation procedures? - Go to
Change in Moderation?
or
too fast closure of threads

hypothesis non fingo-Becareful how you word bratalk. I am near the purple people eader stage if this continues.it is not that "I" try.This has nothing to do with me but the substitution of narrative for poetry by yous guys where I want there to be no biogeographic narrative as recent work on worms showed. Loudmouth learned to appreciate how much work I put into this stuff. There is thread. Follow it.

I agree with the whole "crank" assessment. I guess I disagree with the idea that "lurkers" are in a way harming the discussions as well. On this forum I am mostly a lurker, I admit it, but there's good reason for it. I love to learn. When I first found this site I tried to get involved in discussions/debates, and I openly upfront admitted that my mind has a hard time grasping science, but I was eager to learn. I kind of got slammed a few times by people whose side I am basically on and that kind of shut me up. I could understand if I were claiming to know things I don't, but I was upfront that I didn't fully understand science and wanted to learn. I can understand posting to me that I'm "wrong" or whatever, what got me was the "acidic tone" used at me for not "knowing". I didn't stop posting and continue lurking so much because I was "hurt", but rather because I realize a lot of people here are far more intelligent than me when it comes to science and I have learned a lot from "lurking" here. I do chime in every now and then on other topics that arise that I am more knowledgable about, but mostly I do just lurk. I hope that lurkers won't be banned from here, because as I've said, this is a great forum where you can really learn a lot, and that's why I've stuck around here, albeit silently.
Melissa

quote:

---

When I first found this site I tried to get involved in discussions/debates, and I openly upfront admitted that my mind has a hard time grasping science, but I was eager to learn. I kind of got slammed a few times by people whose side I am basically on and that kind of shut me up.

---

Unfortunately, we have too many here, that jump to turn the heavy guns on anyone they perceive to be even faintly creationist and/or faintly a "know it all".Truthlover had it happen to him, at the "home school evolution question" topic.Moose

---

Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.
"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham

Every time you bring this up, I look at that thread, and the worst on the first page is what Truthlover gets from Zephan, the creationist. I seem to recall Truthlover's agreement with that assessment.I didn't really think the evolutionist response was any different than when somebody comes up to you and says "give me your best shot, right on the jaw," and you, a reasonable person, ask "are you really sure you want me to lay you out?"Maybe you have a specific comment in mind from that thread that was particuarly onerous?

I agree Crash. I've read that thread several times. The only negative comment came from wj in post #2. Considering there were 74 posts in all (some from yours truly), that thread's a pretty poor example of evolutionists bashing creationists on principle. WJ DID jump the gun, but by post #3 the conversation had turned pretty amicable (thank you Dr. Cresswell). By the same token, "we" can get pretty nasty if someone comes in guns ablazin'. I don't know what happened to holly - a link might be helpful. Moose needs to come up with a better illustration of the problem.

One might recall at the time that there were a couple of rather recalcitrant creationist active on the board at that time who were long on rhetoric and short on substance. Truthlover's initial posting citing many pratt creationist arguments and had very much the look of yet another creationist troll. I make no apology for making an agressive challenge in the circumstance. If it scares off a disingenuous troll then much valuable time and effort has been saved. If the person is prepared to meet the challenge then there is some prospect of vigorous discussion.The numerous preach and run creationists have numerous venues for their childish behavour. Why let them waste space on one of the better discussion boards such as this?

T'weren't really a criticism, wj. You only made the one post - and it was more a short "shot across the bows" than a deliberate and persistent attack. I usually have a slightly different approach (i.e., the "every dog gets one bite" system). OTOH, I've been known smack down the typical moron at the starting gate myownself. I just think (with the blinding clarity of 20/20 hindsight, no doubt) that you jumped the gun on that one. TL's OP was much more articulate than the average run-of-the-mill carpet chewer, and probably would have prompted me at least to give the benefit of the doubt - for one post .

I have to side with wj on this. If a new creationist appears on the board with an argument we have seen hundreds of times before it means the person has 1. not even scanned the board casually before jumping in 2. has done so but is a troll. I see no reason to handle them with kid gloves. Those who enter with a moderate approach are usually greeted with moderation. Those who launch into a Fred Williams like diatribe against everyone and everything should not be extended a courtesy they themselves are incapable of extending. The preach and run types take off quickly, others moderate their behavior to fit in..on both sides. What's the problem? Moose should go to a scientific debate on a hot topic..if you think people gun for one another on this board you have not seen anything.

LOL. I give in.I never felt terribly jumped on in that thread. It was just frustrating that it took a while to get any answers to my questions.However, Mammuthus point is a good one. Why would people jump to answer the questions I asked, when they've been answered a thousand times?However, if my first post could be removed as the example, we did scare at least one person off. It would be interesting to find their first thread.

It looks to me like her(?) first thread was Why Did an Evolved Life Form Invent God. Her first posts there are on page 2. She says she's pretty sensitive in the first place, and it does look like that's true.No offense meant, Holly, just trying to put the "hardness" of this board to the test.

Hi, Holly!I had to fight for a long time to get over my fright of saying something really stupid. I seem to have conquered that, but now I'm fighting to stop myself from defending my really stupid comments. That's a work in progress. Lurkers will always be welcome, but the change to a login format *will* cause some minor changes. The nature of these changes hasn't yet been completely specified or even thought through yet, but the goals are:

1. Registered members' login's are remembered, if that's what they want. This means you won't have to login for every browser session.
   ​
2. Those not registered and/or not logged in will still be able to do everything the unregistered can do now. They still wouldn't be able to post to forums which are restricted to registered members.
   ​
3. Those not registered will still be able to post to the [forum=-21] and [forum=-15] forums.
   ​
4. Those who are unregistered or not logged who click on a function that is restricted to registered members will be brought to a screen that asks them to login or register.

--Percy

How are these things different than now, other than my username and password being remembered the first time I post in a browser session? Everything else sounds like no change.

Everytime you compose or edit a message, there are two fields that have to be filled in called Username and Password. These fields will go away. In their place will be a a line that says, "You are logged in as truthlover," or something along those lines. This same line will also appear on most other pages (when possible) in an appropriate spot. On the thread list pages there will be a list of who is logged in. You'll be able to get to your profile page without entering your username and password.--Percy