Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 79 (8898 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-26-2019 10:38 PM
26 online now:
Meddle, Tanypteryx (2 members, 24 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,681 Year: 3,718/19,786 Month: 713/1,087 Week: 82/221 Day: 36/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1011
12
1314
...
21Next
Author Topic:   General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consequtive Consecution
Mr. Ex Nihilo
Member (Idle past 4629 days)
Posts: 708
Joined: 04-12-2005


Message 166 of 302 (277360)
01-08-2006 11:22 PM


Man raised back to life in Jesus' name

It's my own observation that I am really trying hard to discuss ideas with others here in this thread and consider their ideas with respect. Examples where mutual understandings are trying to be attained, in my opinion, include discussions with Ben and schrafinator within this very thread.

It's also my observation, on the other hand, that crashfrog has a tendency to get personal with other posters' here at EvC. Here's some beautiful examples of crashfrog's eloquence so far from this very thread:

crashfrog writes:

In addition to what? A nursing student's list of anecdotes? There's no indication in any of these stories that the recipients weren't told about their donors. A girl completing phrases of songs she's never heard before? I doubt a 16-year-old teenager is capable of writing anything but the most banal, predictable songs in the first place. I regularly am able to accurately predict the ending of movies I've never seen before. Am I a sorcerer? Or just somebody familiar enough with basic movie plotting to pick up on the forshadowing?

Seriously, I'd recommend a little less credulousness on your part.

In response to this, I replied:

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

How old are you crashfrog?

I asked this question because the flippant nature of his post seemed rather juvenile.

To this, crashfrog replied:

crashfrog writes:

Old enough to know better. What's your excuse?

Since I felt that I had explained myself clearly, I retorted:

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

I don't need an excuse.
But, since you seem to be suggesting that your answer (old enough to know better) somehow excused you of something in contrast to my reply, I'll ask what you felt you needed an excuse for?

To this crashfrog replied:

crashfrog writes:

To completely avoid my questions with an ad hominem attack against my age? You're damn right you need an excuse.

How about you answer my questions? How about you address my point?

With this I replied (once again):

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

How about you answer my question?

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

But, since you seem to be suggesting that your answer (old enough to know better) somehow excused you of something in contrast to my reply, I'll ask what you felt you needed an excuse for?

I'll check to see if you answered this later on tonight. :)

To this, crashfrog answered:

crashfrog writes:

Your question doesn't make any sense, and it doesn't appear to be on topic.

In fact it doesn't appear to be anything but a dodge. How about you answer my questions now? Or is nonsense the best you're capable of?

After this, of course, was the caution (yellow alert) from message 249 (which I am seeking more clarification about now).

I'll also note some more beautiful examples of crashfrog's eloquence so far from this very thread.

For example, here's an entire section of text where we were replying back and forth:


crashfrog writes:

What makes you think you get to ask one question and not the other? I mean, that seems to be a fairly reasonable question to ask about souls - where the fuck do they come from? How does a gamete know when to generate a soul? Or do all gametes have mini-souls? Where in the cell is this soul stored?

Mr. Ex Nihilo writes:

Here's a better question: Who cares?

I was responding to sidelined's question:

sidelined writes:


These wave like properties are also detectable. Are you aware of any studies that have detected such?

I answered his question as best as I could. It doesn't have anything to do with sex.

If you want to find out how sex produces souls, maybe you should go watch a porn movie and take notes. Or, better yet, spend time with your S.O. and find out for yourself.

You do have an S.O., correct?


I'll note that my own retort here was a very strong suggestion via his own sexual analogies that he stop trying to derail the topic into boundaries beyond what is currently being discussed.

We are trying to discuss exactly what the soul is in scientific terms and give a proper definition of it in theoretical terms. If we can't even agree with this part, then what good is it to jump ahead of the game invoke the ideas of how sex produces souls in the first place?

It seems to me that one ends up derailing the original thought with bizarre questions that are so right out in left field that one can scarcely believe what they've read as a response.

In fact, this is exactly what happened.

Observe:

crashfrog writes:

I've had sex with my wife a number of times, and other women before that, but never once have I been a part of an act of sex that created some kind of standing-wave time-portal to the initial conditions of the Big Bang. (No pun intended.) You'd think something like that occuring in my partner's vagina would be something she would notice. Like, you'd think it would be a burning sensation, considering that the initial conditions of the Big Bang were ALMOST INFINITE HEAT!

I'll note that there's enough raw material within this one message noted above to keep one laughing for the next month. But, in all seriousness, how exactly does one respond to questions and/or statements like this?

Furthermore, how exactly do statements like this enhance EvC's dedication to "helping develop a better understanding of both sides of the issue"?

Thank you for your time.

This message has been edited by Mr. Ex Nihilo, 01-08-2006 11:23 PM


Replies to this message:
 Message 167 by crashfrog, posted 01-09-2006 1:28 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has responded
 Message 170 by AdminBen, posted 01-09-2006 2:17 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 167 of 302 (277409)
01-09-2006 1:28 AM
Reply to: Message 166 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
01-08-2006 11:22 PM


This whole post is a personal attack against me, and a chronicle of Mr. Ex.'s attempts to dodge uncomfortable questions with personal attacks ("how old are you", "you DO have a S.O. right?") instead of legitimate rebuttals.

What am I old enough to know better? I'm old enough to know better than to try to dismiss an opponent's point because of his age; I'm old enough to know that that's an ad hominem attack and clearly against the guidelines.

What does Mr. Ex. need an excuse for? For responding to a legitimate line of questioning by trying to dismiss me based on my age. Which is really quite funny, since judging by his avatar he's probably not older than I am.

So, let's cover it again, Mr. Ex. What's your excuse for this behavior? What's your excuse for responding to legitimate questions with ad hominem attacks?

For as often as I've been falsely accused of ad hominem by the admins these past few days, let's see if they put their money where their mouths are and deal with this extensive campaign by Mr Ex. to dodge my questions by insulting me.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 01-08-2006 11:22 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 01-09-2006 1:31 AM crashfrog has responded

Mr. Ex Nihilo
Member (Idle past 4629 days)
Posts: 708
Joined: 04-12-2005


Message 168 of 302 (277410)
01-09-2006 1:31 AM
Reply to: Message 167 by crashfrog
01-09-2006 1:28 AM


We'll see what the moderators say.

Edit: I'll also note that even if they decide against me I'll respect that. I just want some answers as to why you're allowed to behave like you do here.

There are plenty of other posters here (posters I don't agree with but I can still learn from) who don't tackle these topics the way you do.

I know I'm not perfect either. I can think of some threads where my sarcasm level was flying high. But you seem to act the same exact way almost every time you post.

This message has been edited by Mr. Ex Nihilo, 01-09-2006 01:36 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by crashfrog, posted 01-09-2006 1:28 AM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by crashfrog, posted 01-09-2006 9:24 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has not yet responded

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 2980 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 169 of 302 (277435)
01-09-2006 2:06 AM


adminasqara
I apologize for the inflammatory portion of my comments you censured on the whale thread. You were correct to censure them.

Would have stated this on the thread, but sort of wondered if it would be off-topic there.


AdminBen
Inactive Member


Message 170 of 302 (277441)
01-09-2006 2:17 AM
Reply to: Message 166 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
01-08-2006 11:22 PM


This is all too much
crashfrog writes:

In addition to what? A nursing student's list of anecdotes? There's no indication in any of these stories that the recipients weren't told about their donors. A girl completing phrases of songs she's never heard before? I doubt a 16-year-old teenager is capable of writing anything but the most banal, predictable songs in the first place. I regularly am able to accurately predict the ending of movies I've never seen before. Am I a sorcerer? Or just somebody familiar enough with basic movie plotting to pick up on the forshadowing?

Seriously, I'd recommend a little less credulousness on your part.

Mr. Ex,

Whether you perceive this post to be "juvenile" or not, crash has consistently addressed the issues. To respond to these valid questions and comments with one sentence--"how old are you?"--is not enough. You're in the wrong.

Now, your "SO" comment is another story. Alone it would be a blatant ad-hominem in a post providing no value. But you buried it in a post where you also addressed issues, and made the comment as a side "barb" in your post.

In other words, you gave crash a taste of his own medicine. If you did it to someone else, it wouldn't be very nice. But crash's posts are littered with these barbs. I find his complaint about that comment to be utterly ridiculous.

If you're gonna take a shot at crash, make sure you do it within the context of addressing the issues directly.

Let this be a warning. You're clearly an amateur at this whole ad-hominem / "poking barbs" thing. I'd suggest not to get involved in it. But if you're going to do it, do it right. If you don't do it right, you'll get suspended.

Clear enough?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 01-08-2006 11:22 PM Mr. Ex Nihilo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 01-09-2006 2:30 AM AdminBen has not yet responded
 Message 173 by crashfrog, posted 01-09-2006 9:26 AM AdminBen has responded

Mr. Ex Nihilo
Member (Idle past 4629 days)
Posts: 708
Joined: 04-12-2005


Message 171 of 302 (277448)
01-09-2006 2:30 AM
Reply to: Message 170 by AdminBen
01-09-2006 2:17 AM


Re: This is all too much
Alright. Warning taken fairly.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by AdminBen, posted 01-09-2006 2:17 AM AdminBen has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 172 of 302 (277492)
01-09-2006 9:24 AM
Reply to: Message 168 by Mr. Ex Nihilo
01-09-2006 1:31 AM


I'll also note that even if they decide against me I'll respect that. I just want some answers as to why you're allowed to behave like you do here.

You mean, ask questions and expect answers?

See, I'm wondering the exact same thing about you. Why is it that you're allowed to respond to a legitimate line of questioning by interrogating me about my age and referring to me as a "juvenile"?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by Mr. Ex Nihilo, posted 01-09-2006 1:31 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by AdminBen, posted 01-09-2006 9:44 AM crashfrog has responded

crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 173 of 302 (277493)
01-09-2006 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 170 by AdminBen
01-09-2006 2:17 AM


Re: This is all too much
If you're gonna take a shot at crash, make sure you do it within the context of addressing the issues directly.

I'm man enough to take some barbs. Honestly I wasn't that offended.

It's the hypocrisy, though, of Mr. Ex. lacing his posts with these clumsy barbs and then referring to me as the one who's getting personal. I don't mind a spitting match, but let's be absolutely clear about who started it in that thread, ok?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by AdminBen, posted 01-09-2006 2:17 AM AdminBen has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by AdminBen, posted 01-09-2006 9:38 AM crashfrog has responded

AdminBen
Inactive Member


Message 174 of 302 (277498)
01-09-2006 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 173 by crashfrog
01-09-2006 9:26 AM


Re: This is all too much
It's the hypocrisy, though, of Mr. Ex. lacing his posts with these clumsy barbs and then referring to me as the one who's getting personal.

That may be what frustrates and annoys you, but I don't see it as the admin's job to moderate "spitting matches." If someone is way out of line (responding with no substrance except an ad-hominem attack), then it's our job to intervene. To referee petty claims of "who started what"? Absolutely not.

If it's important to you that people "spit in good faith", then I think you're SOL. Best solution would probably be "spit abstinence", but just like in real life, that's probably not a realistic solution. Consider this "spit education". Unfortunately, I don't think we offer many forms of protection.

But seriously, I don't think any of the admins are willing to referee this kind of "he said-she said" battle because it's completely unnecessary to start with. We draw a line, and if people cross it, we'll act. Disagreement about "who started it" is not close to that line for this admin. And I highly suspect it is the same for the others moderators as well.

This message has been edited by AdminBen, Monday, 2006/01/09 06:39 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by crashfrog, posted 01-09-2006 9:26 AM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by crashfrog, posted 01-09-2006 9:43 AM AdminBen has responded

crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 175 of 302 (277499)
01-09-2006 9:43 AM
Reply to: Message 174 by AdminBen
01-09-2006 9:38 AM


Re: This is all too much
Heh, fair enough. Though I wasn't the one that demanded moderator action, after all.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by AdminBen, posted 01-09-2006 9:38 AM AdminBen has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by AdminBen, posted 01-09-2006 9:51 AM crashfrog has not yet responded

AdminBen
Inactive Member


Message 176 of 302 (277500)
01-09-2006 9:44 AM
Reply to: Message 172 by crashfrog
01-09-2006 9:24 AM


See, I'm wondering the exact same thing about you. Why is it that you're allowed to respond to a legitimate line of questioning by interrogating me about my age and referring to me as a "juvenile"?

If you're asking why Mr. Ex wasn't suspended, it's because I've found him willing to follow warnings and because I don't see him acting like this.

If you're asking why no comment was made in the thread before Mr. Ex's complaint... I was waiting for Mr. Ex. to drop the issue. The whole ordeal was not very "vicious", and you seemed to want to argue through it on your own. When things didn't resolve through your discussions, then we (mods) were forced to do something.

Feel free to ask more questions about the thought process.

AbE: I was uncloaked!

This message has been edited by AdminBen, Monday, 2006/01/09 06:53 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by crashfrog, posted 01-09-2006 9:24 AM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by crashfrog, posted 01-09-2006 9:46 AM AdminBen has responded

crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 177 of 302 (277501)
01-09-2006 9:46 AM
Reply to: Message 176 by AdminBen
01-09-2006 9:44 AM


If you're asking why Mr. Ex wasn't suspended, it's because I've found him willing to follow warnings and because I don't see him acting like this.

I don't want him suspended. How could he answer my questions if that happened?

What I was asking is why the hypocrisy isn't immediately apparent to him. Only he can say, I guess.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by AdminBen, posted 01-09-2006 9:44 AM AdminBen has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 179 by AdminBen, posted 01-09-2006 9:56 AM crashfrog has not yet responded

AdminBen
Inactive Member


Message 178 of 302 (277502)
01-09-2006 9:51 AM
Reply to: Message 175 by crashfrog
01-09-2006 9:43 AM


Re: This is all too much
I wasn't the one that demanded moderator action, after all.

One quick comment, crash, and I hope it's helpful. When you don't as for moderator action and try to take care of things yourself, 8 out of 10 times we're going to let you guys try to work it out. The 2 out of 10 times we don't let you work it out is when you're dealing with less experienced posters who may feel threatened or attacked.

If you want more moderation in threads where you participate and where you feel people are being unfair, I honestly recommend that you respond less to the offending content; maybe once to comment that you didn't appreciate it or that you thought it was ad-hom. By posting over and over to try and point out who is at fault, you bury the problem in an insane amount of reading, which makes it impossible and unpleasant for the mods to wade through and find the original issue. Which means that unless it jumps out clearly, or if someone goes to ask for help, it's very hard to moderate.

This doesn't go just for you at all. Again, not meant to be an attack or anything; this is supposed to be helpful / constructive. If you feel you want more moderation in your threads, I would suggest posting less to avoid obscuring the problem. That makes it more difficult to moderate the thread.

Damn admin mode to all ... heck (that one's for you PB)

This message has been edited by AdminBen, Monday, 2006/01/09 06:52 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by crashfrog, posted 01-09-2006 9:43 AM crashfrog has not yet responded

AdminBen
Inactive Member


Message 179 of 302 (277504)
01-09-2006 9:56 AM
Reply to: Message 177 by crashfrog
01-09-2006 9:46 AM


What I was asking is why the hypocrisy isn't immediately apparent to him. Only he can say, I guess.

Fair enough. Although I don't think you're going to get an answer; that discussion is off-topic here and also in the original thread. Mr. Ex. has his warning, he's accepted it; it's time to move on for better or for worse.

I'll look forward to his answering your questions. They were reasonable questions, and that's what we're here for anyway, right? Answers to reasonable questions.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by crashfrog, posted 01-09-2006 9:46 AM crashfrog has not yet responded

Silent H
Member (Idle past 3900 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 180 of 302 (277547)
01-09-2006 12:25 PM
Reply to: Message 164 by Adminnemooseus
01-07-2006 4:37 PM


Re: Sometimes you just have to declare a topic to be a terminal mess
We have at least two situations where two members are apparently having trouble understanding/following what the other is saying (the Holmes/Rrhain thing being the other).

Once again this is 100% NOT what has occured in my situation. There is no question about what he said. He accused me of saying and doing things which I simply did not do or say. I think it is hard pressed to claim he does not actually understand what I said, since I have said it to him plainly to correct any possible error and he still repeated the charge as if nothing had been said.

People get upset, and admins are expected to somehow step in and make sense of it all.

In this case NO admin was expected to do anything. I mean it was surprising that none did but I never asked for nor expected that they would. I acted to solve the situation with the expectation that no action was forthcoming.

People (that is me) became confused when suddenly an admin came in and cut off my solution, with an inaccurate insult, and provided me no real solution. At the very least the suggested one could only net me another bit of censure.

People (that is me) got upset, when I came to this forum to ask it be reopened, explaining my reasoning, and got nothing but conflicting and insulting answers.

People (that is me) got more upset, when I essentially junked that and tried to simply get a solution for what I needed to do... which was NEVER a statement of who is right or wrong... and I continued to get nothing but dead air.

I think the only admins I trust on this site are you and ben... and you I believe are the overworked one (well percy is but for efforts outside moderation).

Is it too much to ask to not have an explanation of what I should do to rebut multiple claims of wrongdoing, which I can disprove with evidence, but would be OT in the thread where the claims were made, and the poster is likely to use them again in the future?

And is it too much to ask to have admins explain a decision, and if someone presents a reasonable argument for their actions, get more than a flippant reassertion? Maybe something not condescending?

I'm not blaming you for this, and I know you don't own the other mods, but if you'd perhaps suggest this that'd be great. I was pretty miffed to come back after a weekend break to find no suggestion of a practical solution... and yet another characterization of my dispute as being something that requested admin involvement. It only got bad because an admin stuck his nose in where it was not requested and not required. Okay sorry sorry, it wasn't you. You're cool.

This message has been edited by holmes, 01-09-2006 12:27 PM


holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)
This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Adminnemooseus, posted 01-07-2006 4:37 PM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by AdminBen, posted 01-09-2006 12:58 PM Silent H has responded

  
RewPrev1
...
1011
12
1314
...
21Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019