Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consequtive Consecution
pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6022 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 4 of 302 (271462)
12-21-2005 2:22 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by macaroniandcheese
12-21-2005 2:17 PM


Re: wiki
wiki is an encyclopedia. just like all encyclopedias, it's written by encyclopedia writers and prone to error and non-specificity.
Wikipedia is open to editing by anyone, including you. So it's not quite like all encyclopedias.
It can serve as a good starting point, especially for those who won't understand the primary literature due to technical style and language. However, entries should be reviewed for errors/issues by the person citing the entries (just like with any cite, really, including peer-reviewed ones...)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-21-2005 2:17 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-21-2005 3:39 PM pink sasquatch has not replied

pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6022 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 113 of 302 (276162)
01-05-2006 5:44 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by Silent H
01-05-2006 3:20 PM


let Rrhain defend himself, at least.
I feel I am not getting real answers here.
Despite my recent Festivus grievances against you, I find myself siding with you in this situation, holmes.
You didn't just randomly accuse or belittle Rrhain, instead you provided extensive documentation of what you saw as dishonesty, and asked for a rebuttal. I'm not sure how you could have dealt with the situation better, and it seems like the admins can't come up with anything better, either.
I've found myself in similar situations as you did with Rrhain - even if you choose to "walk away", it is more than frustrating to later come across said poster repeatedly using the same evidence and tactics that were clearly demonstrated to be unethical. When these issues aren't resolved, they can seriously impact the forum as a whole - for example, a couple of weeks ago, it seemed randman brought up the same (repeatedly refuted/unsubstantiated) Haeckel's embryos arguments in every thread he could find, dragging multiple threads off-topic at the same time. I believe admins admonished him in some of those instances, but it simply continued elsewhere, or at other times. In many case suspension doesn't seem to help, as the unethical behavior simply resumes post-suspension.
Sometimes people need to be called out for unethical behavior beyond the thread where it occurs - especially when they use the same unethical tactics across multiple threads.
One common criticism in this forum is that the "evos" don't call each other out for such things as faulty arguments, failure to provide evidence, and dishonesty. In some cases these criticisms are valid. If these faults are seen by admins and they choose to censure the "victim" in the situation, or the person that points out these faults, then something is obviously wrong.
Perhaps the thing I find most inappropriate about the closing of your thread: Rrhain was never given a chance to defend himself. Quite unfair to Rrhain, regardless of whether or not he was very much in the wrong.
The thread could be reopened at least temporarily as a Great Debate between you and Rrhain - if the issue doesn't clarify itself in the first dozen posts, then shut the sucker down.
Hell, repost it in the Festivus Grievance thread - seems very on-topic there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Silent H, posted 01-05-2006 3:20 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by randman, posted 01-05-2006 5:54 PM pink sasquatch has replied
 Message 136 by Silent H, posted 01-06-2006 5:06 AM pink sasquatch has not replied

pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6022 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 117 of 302 (276172)
01-05-2006 6:07 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by randman
01-05-2006 5:54 PM


Re: let Rrhain defend himself, at least.
In no way have I been remotely dishonest or any such thing.
Hi randman,
I'm sorry - I should have been more clear:
I did not mean to claim you were being dishonest, or compare your behavior specifically to Rrhain's alleged tactics.
I was trying to give an example of a poster's recurrent behavior that impacted the forum as a whole. I do believe that there was a time you disrupted a significant portion of the forum by repeating the same Haeckel arguments in several threads at once, all threads where they where inappropriate and off-topic. (In fact, you just presented your Haeckel arguments in this thread, in the post that I am responding to.) Hopefully you recognized that your behavior disrupted more appropriate discussions going on.
Thank you for defending yourself so I could make this clarification - my apologies for the misunderstanding (it sucks to be called a liar).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by randman, posted 01-05-2006 5:54 PM randman has not replied

pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 6022 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 123 of 302 (276179)
01-05-2006 6:15 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by randman
01-05-2006 6:01 PM


we need a bipartisan investigative task force!
Pick a thread, and have someone that is not an evolutionist review the numbers and levels of insults directed at me or Faith or any other creationist, and then the vice versa. I think if you take off your rose-colored glasses, you might see that, in reality, the virtiol, insults, personal attacks, smears, etc,...are far, far more coming out of the evo camp directed towards critics than vice versa.
randman - I would love to see this accounting made and documented for a handful of threads, with both evos and creos documenting the same threads to cross-check biases in the results.
I think both sides are prone to recognize/remember insults thrown at their own side than those thrown at the other. I have a very strong recollection of your recent comment to me:
Your idiocy apparently knows no bounds.
I also think that many creos don't realize they are insulting evos when they claim, based on a few websites, to have a better understanding of science than a lifetime scientist with extensive training.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by randman, posted 01-05-2006 6:01 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by randman, posted 01-05-2006 6:20 PM pink sasquatch has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024