General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consequtive Consecution

I've reveiwed the links here and here's what I've observed:1. Herepton did answer your question, whether you liked the answer or not. Perhaps you could have presented your response to his answer in a less inflamitory manner so as not to have kindled this fire.2. One coming upon the your charge that this was a cut and paste non answer might easily see it as implying a charge of plagarism since this can be a legitimate complaint when in fact someone else's work is being copied.3. It has been implied by some comments of others that whether the quote is Herepton's is questionable, i.e. from one of Herepton's mystery papers. I assume Herepton is claiming it as his own. If that is the case, he should be given the benefit of the doubt until proven wrong.4. Both Herepton and some of his counterparts here should use less inflamitory words in discussing this matter. To quote Solomon, "A soft answer turns away wrath."

Hi Randman. Imo, we of the ideological minority viewpoint and as ones who tend toward Biblical fundamentals need especially to work towards gentleness and kindness in our posting conduct. Meekness is not weakness, but goes a long ways towards keeping the peace and defusing hostility. If anyone should spearhead this attitude, it should be us. I'm working at it and respectfully advise you to diligently work towards a less inflamitory approach as well.Whether or not you see NosyNed as showing bias, imo, you have no beef here. You need to save the beef for something more substantial. You're a valuable asset to the minority viewpoint at EvC! Pay close heed to suggestions, admonitions and advice of admins so as to afford yourself a lasting and pleasant experience here and to continue to bless the board with your knowledge relative to the minority views which we share.

We all have our own evaluation of how substantial an answer is. My point is that you did get an answer which was substantially more than, "Two o'trout, hand me a piano." You need to be reasonable, Crash, and work a little harder towards reconcilliation yourself. No. That's not how the Forum Guidelines work. Someone else's conduct is no justification for mine or yours. Someone needs to defuse hostility before it flares. If we all work at that, we'll all be blessed for it.

I didn't say it was substantial enough to suit you. I said it was an answer which was more substantial than "Two o'trout, hand me a piano."Ray's answer: 1. Perhaps your response could be to offer your evidence for breaching of the barrier in small populations so as to state your answer to Herepton's question and to attempt a refute to his implication that macroevolution is non-existent.2. Herepton's third paragraph should have been stated in a less inflamitory manner. Fine. I have no problem with that. The more we all work at keeping the peace the happier we all are.This message has been edited by buzsaw, 01-28-2006 11:01 PM

Me, Buzsaw, explain science to you, Crashfrog? I'm flattered! Better yet, why not you and Herepton dialogue into the specifics of what either of you don't understand in a congenial manner and work at resolving your problem of communication amongst yourselves in the thread? Anyhow, I'll keep an eye on the thread and if I see where I might be able to contribute I'll add my 2cents worth. Thanks very much, CF, for those kind and encouraging remarks. Glad to help out. I'll work hard at maintaining evenhandedness.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------