Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-27-2019 7:06 AM
26 online now:
Pressie (1 member, 25 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: ooh-child
Post Volume:
Total: 854,844 Year: 9,880/19,786 Month: 2,302/2,119 Week: 338/724 Day: 1/62 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1011
12
1314
...
20Next
Author Topic:   General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consecution
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 666 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 166 of 300 (243544)
09-14-2005 9:33 PM


She just wants attention
Guys, she just wants attention. She'll do anything and say anything to get it. Don't argue with her. Don't address her comments.

She baits people into battles by posting stuff she knows to be factually incorrect so that they will give her attention, then when that isn't enough she comes here and tries to get people banned thus garnishing even more attention.

The common theme is always the same - "Oh, look how I have suffered for my religion". Yawn. Tired of it.

If the consensus is that she's acting like a child, we need to treat her like a child. Don't rise to her taunts, just ignore her.

I believe it was Jimi Hendrix that said, "Turn the other cheek"


Replies to this message:
 Message 167 by Faith, posted 09-14-2005 9:55 PM Nuggin has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 31821
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 167 of 300 (243556)
09-14-2005 9:55 PM
Reply to: Message 166 by Nuggin
09-14-2005 9:33 PM


Actually I want justice
It's not crucial -- it is bad for Jar, not for me -- but I don't feel like letting it go yet. Jar challenged me, I met the challenge and he refuses to acknowledge it. The right thing to do is to acknowledge it.

This message has been edited by Faith, 09-14-2005 10:05 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by Nuggin, posted 09-14-2005 9:33 PM Nuggin has not yet responded

  
tsig
Member (Idle past 1082 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 168 of 300 (243574)
09-14-2005 10:37 PM
Reply to: Message 164 by jar
09-14-2005 7:32 PM


Favoitism
Folk have bent over backwards to grant you special consideration. Stop whining

No, you, Jar have changed the rules to give Faith special consideration.

How can you moderate when you admit you favor some over others?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by jar, posted 09-14-2005 7:32 PM jar has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by Faith, posted 09-14-2005 11:03 PM tsig has responded
 Message 189 by Thugpreacha, posted 10-10-2005 10:05 AM tsig has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 31821
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 169 of 300 (243586)
09-14-2005 11:03 PM
Reply to: Message 168 by tsig
09-14-2005 10:37 PM


Re: Favoritism?
Sigh. I don't buy this whole idea myself. I'm more aware of being summarily suspended from forums without warning, and from the site itself from time to time, a couple times when I knew it was coming, than I am of any favoritism. Of course I'll take their word for it that if it weren't for some judgment in my favor coming from somewhere or other I'd have been permanently banned long before this -- if you want to call being reprieved from that sentence "favoritism." The word is especially ironic when it's often accompanied by the denunciations and namecalling already so abundant in this very discussion here, and the sentiment that the purpose of the leeway given me is to expose my terrible flaws to the world. You sure you want to call this "favoritism?"

Anyway, I would like to point out that I have not myself requested admission to the science forums since I was first suspended from them. I have pointed out the absurdity of banning me from those forums for something I wrote on a NONscience forum, as I think such a policy could use some rethinking, but beyond that I have not requested readmission to the science side. In one case I pointed out that the placing of a particular topic on the science side that was specifically addressed to me wasn't going to work as I couldn't post on it, but what I had in mind was its being moved to a location where I could post on it. Instead, Jar admitted me to that science forum. That was nice of him, but either way would have been OK with me. And the other occasion was IrishRockHound's invitation to me to think through his geology notes, and he requested that I have posting privileges there for that purpose. He thinks like a scientist though, and I think like a YEC and I doubt it's going to work.

Then in the last couple of days Ive begun to get some new understanding of the proportions of the conflict between science and the Biblical God in the evolutionism-creationism dispute, and started posting on that, but my conclusion is not that YECs should be given more leeway but that real debate should be recognized as fundamentally impossible because of the mutually exclusive presuppositions.

I've emphasized that because the rules here are the science rules that the Biblical creationist side is disadvantaged, but I've also recognized that the Biblical side couldn't be admitted on an equal footing either. It's an impossibility. Either position cancels out the other. Ben has been working on some ideas he has about how to accommodate the not-quite-scientific thinking of YECs at EvC and I'm not sure yet what I think of the likelihood of their succeeding, although I think he has a good grasp of some aspects of the problem.

I don't really want to post on the science forums because they don't accommodate the way a YEC thinks. Let scientists post there (even though YEC scientists also think like YECs and don't last too long either). The same science bias, however, also prevails on the nonscience side of the site. This isn't a personal issue really. It's about the terms of the debate here and I think they may be insurmountable, though I'll wait and see if Ben comes up with something workable.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by tsig, posted 09-14-2005 10:37 PM tsig has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by tsig, posted 09-14-2005 11:43 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 176 by Lammy, posted 09-28-2005 12:02 AM Faith has responded

  
tsig
Member (Idle past 1082 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 170 of 300 (243600)
09-14-2005 11:43 PM
Reply to: Message 169 by Faith
09-14-2005 11:03 PM


Re: Favoritism?
Sigh. I don't buy this whole idea myself. I'm more aware of being summarily suspended from forums without warning, and from the site itself from time to time, a couple times when I knew it was coming, than I am of any favoritism

The "poor little me syndrome"


This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by Faith, posted 09-14-2005 11:03 PM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by Nuggin, posted 09-14-2005 11:48 PM tsig has not yet responded
 Message 182 by iano, posted 10-07-2005 11:22 AM tsig has responded

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 666 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 171 of 300 (243604)
09-14-2005 11:48 PM
Reply to: Message 170 by tsig
09-14-2005 11:43 PM


Re: Favoritism?
Bingo. Also, watch for "last word syndrome"
This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by tsig, posted 09-14-2005 11:43 PM tsig has not yet responded

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 2085 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 172 of 300 (243742)
09-15-2005 8:56 AM


What is going on with IRH's Thread?
This, Jazzns, was precisely the kind of thing I was trying to avoid. If you look at the original post, I wanted to provide Faith a chance to work out her ideas from raw data without having conventional geology waved in her face.

Well then I just must not have understood what the heck the purpose of that thread was. In no way was I attacking Faith's ideas of how the flood did anything. All I was doing was trying to point at the raw data. No where was I trying to "wave conventional geology" in her face. All I was doing is addressing her incorrect knowledge of the data. Or am I wrong IRH? Can you create folds in strata similar to the ones you described at a divergent boundary? Is knowledge of tectonic boundaries "waving conventional geology" in her face? I could have gone off like most do talking about how the fountains of the deep are impossible, or more into the details of the flood but I didn't because I knew that would be contrary to her formulating her theory. But why would you want her to create a theory NOT based on the raw data seems not productive in the slightest.

Sure, the sky is orange because of the chemicals left over from the ancient vaport canapy. Oh but wait the sky isn't orange so what the hell use is even discussing a theory that describes fake facts? For another example, what use would be a theory that is contrary to the law of cross cutting relationships. Is that not raw data? Is it not fact that a fault in a rock happened after a rock was formed? What the heck are we calling fact here?

I have no idea what your basis was for closing that thread based on Faith and my discussion. I felt like we were actually getting somewhere. Once we cleared up the whole fold issue she could have moved on to other items and I would have stood back and let her theorize. If you had been reading the auxillary thread about YEC empiricism you would have seen that I was all for you thread and the experiment which you were performing. IMO you were trigger happy on closing your own thread.


No smoking signs by gas stations. No religion in the public square. The government should keep us from being engulfed in flames on earth, and that is pretty much it. -- Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
Faith
Member
Posts: 31821
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 173 of 300 (246758)
09-27-2005 3:18 PM


Ben: mutation thread
Nothing to complain about, as I thought I was probably getting off course, so your comment is well taken. Just want to say there was no intent to distance myself in the post about the 10,000 years, it was simple confusion about whether it was long enough to expect mutation to confer genetic diversity, but I see that it could have been misread. No problem.
Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by nwr, posted 09-27-2005 3:45 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 175 by AdminBen, posted 09-27-2005 8:29 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 5585
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 174 of 300 (246762)
09-27-2005 3:45 PM
Reply to: Message 173 by Faith
09-27-2005 3:18 PM


Re: Ben: mutation thread
A comment from an observer (me) of Some mutations sound too good to be true. On my reading, Faith was mainly seeking clarification. When she brought up Noah's flood, I took her as asking what evolution would expect from the bottleneck that would exist, if the flood story were correct. I did not take her as using that to challenge the science. I took this as within the intended scope of the thread.

This is probably the wrong place, but I would like to compliment the several participants in that thread. Overall it has been, and continues to be, an excellent discussion. And it seems to me that Faith has learned quite a bit about the role of mutations. For that matter, I have learned a thing or two myself.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by Faith, posted 09-27-2005 3:18 PM Faith has not yet responded

AdminBen
Inactive Member


Message 175 of 300 (246819)
09-27-2005 8:29 PM
Reply to: Message 173 by Faith
09-27-2005 3:18 PM


Re: Ben: mutation thread
Faith,

Sure, thanks for being understanding. I am still trying to be ultra-conservative. I really think that's the best formula for success. Thanks for being willing to take my comments and suggestions for what they are--simply comments and suggestions on how we can continue to make this thing work.

Thanks also for your effort, and the effort of all those participating in the thread. I share nwr's sentiments about the effort and information in the thread, and I've learned a lot myself as well.

If you do have comments or suggestions in the future, I will be open to listening. So feel free to post them here anytime.

Ben


This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by Faith, posted 09-27-2005 3:18 PM Faith has not yet responded

Lammy
Member
Posts: 3610
From: Chicago
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 176 of 300 (246855)
09-28-2005 12:02 AM
Reply to: Message 169 by Faith
09-14-2005 11:03 PM


Re: Favoritism?
Faith writes:

I have pointed out the absurdity of banning me from those forums for something I wrote on a NONscience forum, as I think such a policy could use some rethinking, but beyond that I have not requested readmission to the science side.


As a matter of fact, I was very very close to pointing out that I thought AN suspended you from the science forum out of immediate frustration and anger. I specifically remember that AN asked you for some sort of evidence (probably science base) while you were discussing something with other people in a non-science forum. You refused and implied that he could ban you from the science forum if he wanted to, to which he did.

Like I said, I almost rushed to your defence, but your later posts indicated that (at least at the time) you had no interest to participate in a science based discussion with other people. Without your reassurance that you were still interested in discussing with people on science using the parameters of science, I decided not to pursue it.

With that said, I must admit that AN's decision really really looked like it was not a decision as an admin but as someone who favored scientific evidence over religious. If you had pursued this matter, I'm sure myself and others like myself would have backed you up.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by Faith, posted 09-14-2005 11:03 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by Faith, posted 09-28-2005 12:44 AM Lammy has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 31821
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 177 of 300 (246859)
09-28-2005 12:44 AM
Reply to: Message 176 by Lammy
09-28-2005 12:02 AM


Re: Favoritism?
Thank you for the spirit in which you wrote that. Unfortunately I don't remember the specifics very well any more. I did think I should avoid the science forums as much as possible, although I thought banning me from them didn't make sense, as I expected to play by the science rules if I did post on them.

This message has been edited by Faith, 09-28-2005 06:10 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by Lammy, posted 09-28-2005 12:02 AM Lammy has not yet responded

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 3132 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 178 of 300 (246999)
09-28-2005 3:03 PM


Thread for two people doesn't belong in a public forum
Reply to Ben,

If two members wish to have a discussion then it should go in the Great Debate forum. All other forums are public access, if the two aren't happy then they can have a private email discussion.

As for suggesting opening a thread, what is assinine is expecting someone who doesn't mention a new topic to open a thread on it.

Jesus, get a grip. :laugh:


  
Faith
Member
Posts: 31821
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 179 of 300 (249530)
10-06-2005 12:47 PM


Jar a bit trigger happy there?
Couldn't even let the clever-evolutionists question-begging thread go a few more over 300 to see if we could bring it to a close?
Replies to this message:
 Message 180 by AdminBrian, posted 10-06-2005 12:52 PM Faith has responded

  
AdminBrian
Inactive Member


Message 180 of 300 (249534)
10-06-2005 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 179 by Faith
10-06-2005 12:47 PM


Re: Jar a bit trigger happy there?
Simply start a 'part two' with a link to the first one!

Going over 300 is very unstable.

Would you like me to start a continuation thread?

AdminBrian


This message is a reply to:
 Message 179 by Faith, posted 10-06-2005 12:47 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by Faith, posted 10-06-2005 1:01 PM AdminBrian has not yet responded

RewPrev1
...
1011
12
1314
...
20Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019