Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9072 total)
60 online now:
nwr, Theodoric (2 members, 58 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Post Volume: Total: 893,162 Year: 4,274/6,534 Month: 488/900 Week: 12/182 Day: 12/28 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consequtive Consecution
AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 302 (273197)
12-27-2005 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Adminnemooseus
12-27-2005 10:32 AM


Re: Mark24 at a "Great Debate" topic he shouldn't have posted in
IMHO the best procedure in this case, as valuable as the content of the messages might be (and I think both messages were very good, very important, is to remove that content.

The nature of a Great Debate is meant to be a limited discussion betwen two individuals. Additional input, no matter how good, no matter how much it adds to the content, is not appropriate.

However, in this case a moderator has already stepped in and made a decision and Mark24 has responded and said he would not post further. I would let this one stand as is.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-27-2005 10:32 AM Adminnemooseus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-27-2005 10:57 AM AdminJar has taken no action

Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3958
Joined: 09-26-2002
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 17 of 302 (273203)
12-27-2005 10:57 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by AdminJar
12-27-2005 10:41 AM


Re: Mark24 at a "Great Debate" topic he shouldn't have posted in
As I was doing my previous message, AdminNWR has deleted the content of the cited message 24. I agree with your message 16, and with AdminNWR's action.

As I type this, there is still the non content deleted message 22 by Mark24 at that "Great Debate" topic. I had not previously noticed it. I guess its content should also be deleted, but I will leave that to AdminNWR.

Adminnemooseus


This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by AdminJar, posted 12-27-2005 10:41 AM AdminJar has taken no action

AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 18 of 302 (273204)
12-27-2005 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Adminnemooseus
12-27-2005 10:32 AM


Re: Mark24 at a "Great Debate" topic he shouldn't have posted in
In the past I have, without hesitation, given such messages the "content deleted" treatment. In the above cited situation, however, I feel I must be more tolerant to Mark24, he being the long and distinguished forum member he is.

In this case I left the first of the mark24 posts untouched, since Carico had already responded.

For the second, the content is mostly still there, visible via "Peek", but masked to not display.

The big question: How should we handle "Great Debate" intrusions by non-designated members?

In general, I think the contents should be deleted or masked. Maybe we need a dB code to make it easy to mask contents.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-27-2005 10:32 AM Adminnemooseus has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Nuggin, posted 12-27-2005 1:57 PM AdminNWR has taken no action
 Message 20 by mark24, posted 12-27-2005 2:09 PM AdminNWR has taken no action

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 1727 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 19 of 302 (273241)
12-27-2005 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by AdminNWR
12-27-2005 10:58 AM


Nuggin's 2cs
While I wasn't offended by Mark's input, I think that the content deleted solution is probably the best one.

If someone has input for the debate, they should feel free to email the parties involved, or, as was done in another debate, start a peanut gallery thread.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by AdminNWR, posted 12-27-2005 10:58 AM AdminNWR has taken no action

mark24
Member (Idle past 4429 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 20 of 302 (273244)
12-27-2005 2:09 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by AdminNWR
12-27-2005 10:58 AM


Re: Mark24 at a "Great Debate" topic he shouldn't have posted in
AdminNWR,

n this case I left the first of the mark24 posts untouched, since Carico had already responded. For the second, the content is mostly still there, visible via "Peek", but masked to not display.

I didn't realise this, & in which case there is no harm done. I'll just repost in the thread that I wanted Carico to respond in.

My real objection was that, although I was as a "point of law" in the wrong, that my work & the time it took to write it was gone. Given that this isn't the case, I have no objection.

Also, I could have sworn that it wasn't a great debate when I checked earlier, I just looked & it is, so I'm doubly wrong & need new glasses.

Mark

This message has been edited by mark24, 12-27-2005 02:11 PM


There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by AdminNWR, posted 12-27-2005 10:58 AM AdminNWR has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-27-2005 2:21 PM mark24 has taken no action

Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3958
Joined: 09-26-2002
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 21 of 302 (273248)
12-27-2005 2:21 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by mark24
12-27-2005 2:09 PM


Re: Mark24 at a "Great Debate" topic he shouldn't have posted in
My real objection was that, although I was as a "point of law" in the wrong, that my work & the time it took to write it was gone.

It was a nice message in the well defined wrong place. You had to be shot.:) Sorry about that.

:)Adminnemooseus:)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by mark24, posted 12-27-2005 2:09 PM mark24 has taken no action

Carico
Inactive Member


Message 22 of 302 (273455)
12-28-2005 10:06 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Adminnemooseus
12-27-2005 10:32 AM


Re: Mark24 at a "Great Debate" topic he shouldn't have posted in
What difference does it make if someone is a designated or non-designated member if he is speaking the truth? Isn't a desire for the truth the most important factor here? Or do people not know what the truth is and have to rely on the status of a member to tell them what it is? Thank you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-27-2005 10:32 AM Adminnemooseus has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by robinrohan, posted 12-28-2005 10:13 AM Carico has taken no action
 Message 24 by AdminNWR, posted 12-28-2005 10:20 AM Carico has taken no action

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 302 (273456)
12-28-2005 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Carico
12-28-2005 10:06 AM


Re: Mark24 at a "Great Debate" topic he shouldn't have posted in
Or do people not know what the truth is

You got it, Carico.

and have to rely on the status of a member to tell them what it is?

I do rely on other members to tell me the truth. The only problem is they tell me different things.

This message has been edited by robinrohan, 12-28-2005 09:13 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Carico, posted 12-28-2005 10:06 AM Carico has taken no action

AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 24 of 302 (273459)
12-28-2005 10:20 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Carico
12-28-2005 10:06 AM


Re: Mark24 at a "Great Debate" topic he shouldn't have posted in
What difference does it make if someone is a designated or non-designated member if he is speaking the truth?

It is about following rules, as is required for orderly debates.

In Forum The Great Debate, discussion is specifically limited to the designated participants.

The problem with mark24's post was that he should not have posted anything in that thread. It is supposed to be a thread for only you and nuggin.

This message has been edited by AdminNWR, 12-28-2005 09:21 AM


To comment on moderation procedures or respond to admin messages:
  • Discussion of moderation procedures
  • Comments on promotions of Proposed New Topics
  • Thread Reopen Requests

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 22 by Carico, posted 12-28-2005 10:06 AM Carico has taken no action

    Buzsaw
    Inactive Member


    Message 25 of 302 (273691)
    12-28-2005 10:29 PM


    Moderation Request
    Will a neutral moderator please take a look at the problem I'm having with member/admin Jar in my Faith and Belief thread dealing with the respective gods of the prophets Jesus and Muhammed? Jar persists in repeating his question, "How many gods are there." The question has been answered to the extent that it pertains to the thread. I have requested that if Jar wishes to discuss his topic further he needs to open his own thread, but he persists in denying my request. His topic has been discussed before and can get involved to the extent that it would draw my thread off topic. Thanks.

    Replies to this message:
     Message 26 by Faith, posted 12-28-2005 10:32 PM Buzsaw has taken no action
     Message 27 by AdminAsgara, posted 12-28-2005 10:42 PM Buzsaw has taken no action
     Message 28 by AdminBen, posted 12-28-2005 10:56 PM Buzsaw has replied

    Faith 
    Suspended Member (Idle past 678 days)
    Posts: 35298
    From: Nevada, USA
    Joined: 10-06-2001


    Message 26 of 302 (273692)
    12-28-2005 10:32 PM
    Reply to: Message 25 by Buzsaw
    12-28-2005 10:29 PM


    Re: Moderation Request
    I absolutely resoundingly second, support and endorse Buz's request. Jar's contributions to that thread are nothing but nuisance posts that have been answered dozens of times already.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 25 by Buzsaw, posted 12-28-2005 10:29 PM Buzsaw has taken no action

    AdminAsgara
    Administrator (Idle past 1536 days)
    Posts: 2073
    From: The Universe
    Joined: 10-11-2003


    Message 27 of 302 (273695)
    12-28-2005 10:42 PM
    Reply to: Message 25 by Buzsaw
    12-28-2005 10:29 PM


    Re: Moderation Request
    I'm sure I do not qualify in your eyes as a neutral mod, but the questions seem spot on topic to me. If you are discussing whether or not various people worship/are inspired by different gods you would first have to establish how many gods there are.

    But again, i'm sure I am not qualified to answer this question.


    AdminAsgara Queen of the Universe

    Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
  • General discussion of moderation procedures

  • Thread Reopen Requests

  • Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
  • New Members: to get an understanding of what makes great posts, check out:

  • "Post of the Month Forum"

  • "Columnist's Corner" Forum
  • See also Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC, and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting

    http://asgarasworld.bravepages.com http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 25 by Buzsaw, posted 12-28-2005 10:29 PM Buzsaw has taken no action

    AdminBen
    Inactive Member


    Message 28 of 302 (273702)
    12-28-2005 10:56 PM
    Reply to: Message 25 by Buzsaw
    12-28-2005 10:29 PM


    Re: Moderation Request
    buz,

    First, I wanted to say I do appreciate that you're trying to do the right things, to find appropriate ways to deal with things that you feel are inappropriate.

    I took a look through the OP and later posts that seemed relevant. Seems the problem is simply that jar is asking questions without giving a reason behind them, and you don't see how they're relevant to the thread.

    I think the most simple solution would simply be, ask jar how his questions are relevant to the thread. Both of your behaviors is a little bit strange to me; you could have asked jar why he thought the questions were relevant, and jar could have explained the relevance without your overt question, when he saw that it wasn't obvious to you why they were relevant.

    To summarize, I don't think there's any need for moderator action; a simple question to jar about the relevance of the questions seems like a straightforward solution.

    AbE: Looks like Jar explained his thinking process here.

    I do wish everybody here (jar included) would get in the habit of asking people why they think certain questions / comments are on topic, and explaining why questions / comments seem off-topic, rather than making a bare statement that something is "off-topic." Without the comments, it's often not obvious why something is declared to be off-topic, and it just looks like dodging the issues.

    I'll look at bringing this to greater attention if the trouble persists.

    This message has been edited by AdminBen, Wednesday, 2005/12/28 08:00 PM


    Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
  • General discussion of moderation procedures
  • Thread Reopen Requests
  • Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum

    New Members: to get an understanding of what makes great posts, check out:

  • "Post of the Month" Forum
  • "Columnist's Corner" Forum

    See also Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC, and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting


  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 25 by Buzsaw, posted 12-28-2005 10:29 PM Buzsaw has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 29 by Faith, posted 12-28-2005 11:05 PM AdminBen has taken no action
     Message 32 by Buzsaw, posted 12-29-2005 1:30 AM AdminBen has replied

    Faith 
    Suspended Member (Idle past 678 days)
    Posts: 35298
    From: Nevada, USA
    Joined: 10-06-2001


    Message 29 of 302 (273705)
    12-28-2005 11:05 PM
    Reply to: Message 28 by AdminBen
    12-28-2005 10:56 PM


    Re: Moderation Request
    We KNOW why he is asking the questions. Please see my last post on that thread.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 28 by AdminBen, posted 12-28-2005 10:56 PM AdminBen has taken no action

    Replies to this message:
     Message 30 by macaroniandcheese, posted 12-29-2005 12:16 AM Faith has replied

    macaroniandcheese 
    Suspended Member (Idle past 3162 days)
    Posts: 4258
    Joined: 05-24-2004


    Message 30 of 302 (273717)
    12-29-2005 12:16 AM
    Reply to: Message 29 by Faith
    12-28-2005 11:05 PM


    Re: Moderation Request
    because he wants answers. christ's sake just answer him so he'll shut up.

    even i'll agree he's reaching at straws but we can't prove it until you give him the ammo that he'll turn into blanks. you look weak by ignoring him. just answer him.

    This message has been edited by brennakimi, 12-29-2005 12:17 AM


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 29 by Faith, posted 12-28-2005 11:05 PM Faith has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 31 by Faith, posted 12-29-2005 12:38 AM macaroniandcheese has taken no action

    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.1
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022