Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consecution
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 2 of 300 (236934)
08-25-2005 4:21 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by AdminJar
08-24-2005 11:05 PM


Nuggin deserves a suspension
Nuggin barges onto thread without bothering to read any of it and then launches this personal attack, which should earn him a suspension: Message 261
Also see this he posted later, from someone who has not participated on the thread but only joins in to levy abuse: Message 277
This message has been edited by Faith, 08-26-2005 02:57 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by AdminJar, posted 08-24-2005 11:05 PM AdminJar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by AdminPhat, posted 08-27-2005 4:37 AM Faith has replied
 Message 13 by Theodoric, posted 08-27-2005 6:21 PM Faith has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 6 of 300 (237685)
08-27-2005 11:42 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by AdminPhat
08-27-2005 4:37 AM


Re: Nuggin deserves a suspension
Thank you, Phat. If this kind of personal abuse is allowed to go unchecked the place just becomes a nightmare for creationists.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by AdminPhat, posted 08-27-2005 4:37 AM AdminPhat has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 7 of 300 (237742)
08-27-2005 4:10 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by AdminPhat
08-27-2005 4:37 AM


Re: Nuggin deserves a suspension
Apparently Nuggin was not actually suspended as here he is posting as late as 1:30 today although you posted your suspension of him at 4:30 this morning:
http://EvC Forum: A Closer Look at Pat Robertson -->EvC Forum: A Closer Look at Pat Robertson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by AdminPhat, posted 08-27-2005 4:37 AM AdminPhat has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by CK, posted 08-27-2005 4:14 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 16 by Phat, posted 08-27-2005 7:24 PM Faith has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 12 of 300 (237770)
08-27-2005 5:10 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by CK
08-27-2005 4:30 PM


Re: Nuggin deserves a suspension
Uh huh, well, all you self-righteous perfect pure people who give yourselves the right to trash others, it works both ways. I don't trash you, you don't trash me. The Forum Guidelines prohibit personal attacks. You are SOOOOOOOOO sure of your moral superiority and my sinfulness but fortunately there are laws that protect people from that kind of judgmentalness you enforce with abusive language. Nuggin deserves a suspension and if that kind of abusiveness is not punished the place will only deteriorate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by CK, posted 08-27-2005 4:30 PM CK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by CK, posted 08-27-2005 6:34 PM Faith has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 17 of 300 (237819)
08-27-2005 7:36 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Phat
08-27-2005 7:24 PM


Re: Nuggin deserves a suspension
I just saw him posting when I thought he was supposed to be gone, that's all. I checked the time after that. Glad to hear he apologized.
This message has been edited by Faith, 08-27-2005 07:37 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Phat, posted 08-27-2005 7:24 PM Phat has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 18 of 300 (237824)
08-27-2005 7:45 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by CK
08-27-2005 6:31 PM


Re: Yes I do will turn snitch!
You asked in your next post what I mean by your accusing me of sin. Well this post is a perfect example of it. Sin = moral failure, moral transgression. Just one accusation after another -- I'm the bad guy because I denounce others for their personal attacks on my character, which have often come from you as well as others. Yes I'd be a better person if I were less hotheaded I'm sure, and I'm trying to cool it and may God change me, but I'm generally not attacking people for their beliefs and opinions and making comments about their character based on their beliefs and opinions but for their attacks on mine. You seem to overlook that part of the exchange.
This message has been edited by Faith, 08-27-2005 07:46 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by CK, posted 08-27-2005 6:31 PM CK has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 20 of 300 (237831)
08-27-2005 8:10 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Nuggin
08-27-2005 8:01 PM


Re: Wow, I'm famous!
It is not your place to judge what I believe, no matter WHAT you think of it, and you have dogged my steps ever since, setting yourself up as my judge and jury which is outrageously arrogant of you. I'm glad you have apologized but that sort of behavior deserves more than a 24 hour suspension otherwise. And you had barged into the middle of a tricky discussion with your post about the geological issues, apparently without having read any of the previous thread, and I'd just had about all I could take. Yes, I need to simmer down too, God help me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Nuggin, posted 08-27-2005 8:01 PM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Theodoric, posted 08-27-2005 8:17 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 23 by Nuggin, posted 08-27-2005 9:10 PM Faith has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 26 of 300 (237882)
08-28-2005 12:29 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by Nuggin
08-27-2005 9:10 PM


Re: Wow, I'm famous!
You are right and I will stop posting personal attacks, even to personal attacks. But yours WERE personal judgmentalness, which is what I'm commenting on, not discussions of the topic at all. NEVERTHELESS, I will not respond in kind again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Nuggin, posted 08-27-2005 9:10 PM Nuggin has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 46 of 300 (238335)
08-29-2005 3:36 PM


Request for moderation
See:
Thread No Gospel without Wrath etc, Post 100 and following post 101.
I have been struggling to keep this thread on topic. Paisano claims what I've called off topic is really on topic. I don't want to see it get off on all these side trips, but request moderator opinion.
This message has been edited by Faith, 08-29-2005 03:36 PM

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 116 of 300 (242011)
09-09-2005 10:32 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by Ben!
09-09-2005 10:07 PM


Re: Another path to a correct hypothesis?
Well, I personally think I made some very good points on the thread about the Southwest that turned so many on the other side into raving beasts. They all degenerate into lunacy and nosy pulls the thread before I can get back to it, specifically to prevent ME from posting. Aint that sweet. Well, as I said, nobody really wants any input from Bible literalists anyway.
So Ben, one of the posts I was going to get to next, that now I can't, was yours where you said you wanted to discuss this problem about science versus whatever you think I'm doing. Thanks for your considerate and fair attitude. I don't see any problem myself except that my opposition is hidebound and uncivil to say the least, but if you have something to say you think we can discuss to a constructive end, please start a thread I can participate in, since I'm banned from science threads, including "Is it Science."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Ben!, posted 09-09-2005 10:07 PM Ben! has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by kjsimons, posted 09-09-2005 10:40 PM Faith has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 119 of 300 (242016)
09-09-2005 10:51 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by Ben!
09-09-2005 8:14 PM


Re: Stop smoking when it burns your lips
Step 1: Choose your faith-based hypothesis.
Step 2: Collect data
Step 3: Come up with an explanation that fits both the data and your hypothesis.
Repeat until all data are fit.
I'm not completely sure of this yet though it looks promising. Is this what you think creationists in general are doing?
In this case, no experiment necessary--there's tons of geologic data readily available. But once you have a model (see step 3), you can make predictions for further data.
I think that makes sense.
Faith is clearly doing empirical investigation.
Thank you, certainly seems so to me.
She's not doing it scientifically.
I guess this is the part you're going to have to explain. Not that I'm stuck on the term, as I've explained, but if it's empirical and it's logical, why isn't it science?
Who ever told you science was the only way to find a correct hypothesis given a set of data? Nobody cares if the hypothesis is a priori or not; it's whether it's RIGHT OR NOT (i.e. models data) that we care about. And that's simply seeing if the observed data fits within the model, and to see if the predictions the model makes hold in the future as well.
Makes sense to me. Now apparently you are going to have a problem explaining it to your science-minded friends here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Ben!, posted 09-09-2005 8:14 PM Ben! has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 120 of 300 (242020)
09-09-2005 11:28 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by Ben!
09-09-2005 10:07 PM


Re: Another path to a correct hypothesis?
If Faith wants to use her time to try find find a theory that matches evidence to Biblical stories, why so many people get angry and yell?
Yes, why?
Let her do it! If she succeeds, great for her! If she does not, then you can all say "told you so."
Thank you.
Funny how the thread has died now. Dear dear, how ARE they going to deal with us literalists. They can't live with us and they can't live without us.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Ben!, posted 09-09-2005 10:07 PM Ben! has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 124 of 300 (242060)
09-10-2005 6:53 AM
Reply to: Message 123 by Admin
09-10-2005 5:33 AM


Re: Topic Drift Warning
I cannot post to the Is It Science threads but Ben originally asked me to discuss this with him.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Admin, posted 09-10-2005 5:33 AM Admin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by Admin, posted 09-10-2005 7:05 AM Faith has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 126 of 300 (242062)
09-10-2005 7:11 AM
Reply to: Message 125 by Admin
09-10-2005 7:05 AM


Re: Topic Drift Warning
Thank you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by Admin, posted 09-10-2005 7:05 AM Admin has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 127 of 300 (242097)
09-10-2005 2:21 PM


The same old problem revisited
Concerning the thread that asks Have any Biblical Literalists been to the American Southwest:
Without even making an issue of the abusiveness I had to endure on that thread by more than one poster, I do wonder how it serves EvC to have a thread on which I am energetically posting pulled out from under me and put into a science category where now it is languishing from lack of interest. It seems to be a form of suspending me without actually suspending me and the rudeness and unfairness are blatant.
The thread was originally specifically placed in a non-science forum in order for Biblical literalists to respond to it. As Ben pointed out, it was the scientists, not I, who turned it into a science discussion. But then it was I, not the scientists, who can no longer post on it. And they have no interest in the subject without me to call names.
Over and over what the scientists appear to object to most is the very thing a YEC does by definition, assume that they are wrong about an old earth, that the Bible is right, that the Flood actually happened. This is what a YEC assumes and tries to prove in any discussion of these things. It is ridiculous to allow this complaint from the scientists if you have any expectation of YECs posting here. The discussion must begin with the YEC assumptions or there is no discussion possible, at least on the non-science side of the board. I am called every name in the book for simply doing what a YEC does. This is absolutely absurd.
This message has been edited by Faith, 09-10-2005 02:25 PM

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by crashfrog, posted 09-10-2005 2:33 PM Faith has replied
 Message 129 by nwr, posted 09-10-2005 2:35 PM Faith has replied
 Message 130 by Nuggin, posted 09-10-2005 3:03 PM Faith has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024