|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,890 Year: 4,147/9,624 Month: 1,018/974 Week: 345/286 Day: 1/65 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: General discussion of moderation procedures | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
Jar considered it closed temporarily while he asked for advice. We'll see what the consensus is.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
Was I being defensive? It didn't feel that way to me. I was just trying to make sure it was understood and made a suggestion to get the questions rolling.
That second post and rather chaotic set of questions I would like to see discussed actually. But not all at once.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
I think that the difference might be a "no dicussion" rule. One question - one or a very few answers. No back and forth. The questions should be well formed and put through the PNT.
These threads would end up as a kind of FAQ list.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
Percy is the alter ego of an admin, in fact THE Admin. He should be held to a higher standard than you are (perhaps higher than anyone).
What can pass from someone not used to civilized, intellectual debate can not pass from someone who has had years to practice.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
There may be rare occations when someone is lying AND you can show that unequivicably. In those cases all you have to do is show your evidence that some statement is wrong. Others may draw conclusions that the individual was wrong in such a way they HAD to have been lying. You do not have to make the statment yourself.
It will be very rare indeed that you can be sure that a person is lying rather than mistaken and/or very stupid. For this reason calling someone a liar is always a bad idea. To maintain civil discussion the policy is that you simple don't use the word but may choose to make the contrast between the statment made and the facts very clear. The intentions of the person making the statment are something each individual has to suss out.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
To discuss in the evidence forums, Buz, you need to conduct your debate in an appropriate fashion.
Previously, you demonstrated that you don't understand the concept. You reminded everyone of that with your first few posts. It will save you time and effort and aggravation of others this way. You may espouse your faith in the way that you understand in the faith and belief forums.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
Sorry, Buz, you will have to find someone else to carry on a fruitless, endless discussion with.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
If you want to conduct an actually "science"-like discussion, Buz, you may open a thread on the F&B side if you want and request in your opening post that scientific standards be applied.
I don't think it would be fair to have admin enforcement of that to too great a degree but I'm sure others would hold the conversation to such standards. Who knows maybe you can show an ability to handle such discussions.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024