Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consequtive Consecution
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 120 of 302 (276176)
01-05-2006 6:09 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by Faith
01-05-2006 6:07 PM


Re: Do something abour Randman and Faith
You owe me an apology.
Yeah, but you owe me one, which you've never delivered, so I wouldn't go around expecting people to take you seriously about things like that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by Faith, posted 01-05-2006 6:07 PM Faith has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


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 replied

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

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


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 replied

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

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


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 replied

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

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


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 replied

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

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


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 replied

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

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 186 of 302 (277671)
01-10-2006 12:41 AM
Reply to: Message 184 by Adminnemooseus
01-09-2006 6:20 PM


Re: Faith quoting a Bible verse
I wonder if someone was requesting a Biblical source from someone other than Faith, and Faith stepped in and supplied the source.
Yes. I asked Buz for a cite and Faith provided it (and my thanks to her for doing so.) It's ridiculous that, after several posts by Faith and myself making it clear that that's what was going on, there's still puzzlement about why Faith would post a verse and then not appear to be supporting it's position.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by Adminnemooseus, posted 01-09-2006 6:20 PM Adminnemooseus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 187 by Faith, posted 01-10-2006 1:30 AM crashfrog has replied
 Message 191 by Adminnemooseus, posted 01-10-2006 12:25 PM crashfrog has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 190 of 302 (277726)
01-10-2006 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 187 by Faith
01-10-2006 1:30 AM


Re: Faith quoting a Bible verse
Just for that, CF, I will apologize for telling you off about your political rant. Sorry to have lost my temper at you to such an extent. Let's stay cool.
Let's do. You have a piercing, fascinating intellect when you're willing to approach the subject with an open mind, so it's usually enjoyable to talk to you.
You probably don't find the same thing about me, for which I am sorry.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 187 by Faith, posted 01-10-2006 1:30 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by Faith, posted 01-10-2006 10:02 PM crashfrog has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 270 of 302 (282207)
01-28-2006 4:44 PM
Reply to: Message 262 by Cold Foreign Object
01-28-2006 2:19 PM


Re: Plargiarism Charge
You've misunderstood, and you're blowing it way out of proportion.
All I meant was that you copied and pasted some kind of boilerplate response (or perhaps out of your oft-mentioned "paper") you have to "Darwinists" (whatever they are) rather than actually grappling with my questions. Questions you still have not responded to.
Also, you never provided any indication or support for your assertion of "experiments".
You have not been accused of plagarism, and this attempt and distraction and diversion is both reprehensible and futile.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 262 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 01-28-2006 2:19 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by AdminBuzsaw, posted 01-28-2006 5:23 PM crashfrog has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 280 of 302 (282237)
01-28-2006 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 278 by AdminBuzsaw
01-28-2006 5:23 PM


Re: Plargiarism Charge
Herepton did answer your question
Not in any meaninful way. Maybe you and I have two different ideas of what it means to answer a question, but when I ask "Why is the sky blue?" and the response is "Two o'trout, hand me a piano", I don't consider that an answer.
Ray's response was equally nonsense, equally a non-sequiter. He did not answer the question.
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."
I'm content to address other members in the manner that they address me. This is my well-known mode of operation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by AdminBuzsaw, posted 01-28-2006 5:23 PM AdminBuzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by AdminBuzsaw, posted 01-28-2006 7:10 PM crashfrog has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 283 of 302 (282249)
01-28-2006 7:28 PM
Reply to: Message 282 by AdminBuzsaw
01-28-2006 7:10 PM


Re: Plargiarism Charge
My point is that you did get an answer which was substantially more than, "Two o'trout, hand me a piano."
I'm sorry, but I simply couldn't make heads or tails of Ray's response to me. If you believe that his response was substantial, then perhaps you'd like to drop into that thread and explain it to little ol' me.
No. That's not how the Forum Guidelines work.
Let me rephrase; short of violations of the guidelines, I'm content to respond in kind. It's generally the only way people understand; by tailoring your responses to their unique perspective.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by AdminBuzsaw, posted 01-28-2006 7:10 PM AdminBuzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 284 by AdminBuzsaw, posted 01-28-2006 11:00 PM crashfrog has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 286 of 302 (282312)
01-29-2006 1:07 PM
Reply to: Message 284 by AdminBuzsaw
01-28-2006 11:00 PM


Re: Plargiarism Charge
Because genuine non-Darwinian macroevolution is a fact within kinds.
These large populations have never been breached. Darwinists come along and assert their macro must be true based upon whatever degree of micro occurring within the kind.
Buz, if you can make heads or tails of these sentences, which are completely devoid of meaning to me - I literally can't understand what Ray is trying to say, here - then like I said, I'd appreciate it if you wanted to drop into the discussion and explain it to me.
If you don't believe that I simply don't understand, then I guess I don't know what to say to you. But I have appreciated your moderation on this issue. Very even-handed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 284 by AdminBuzsaw, posted 01-28-2006 11:00 PM AdminBuzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 287 by AdminBuzsaw, posted 01-29-2006 1:40 PM crashfrog has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 296 of 302 (283691)
02-03-2006 5:27 PM


My Bad
I didn't immediately associate Arach's new alias with Arach; as a result, I didn't realize I had posted in a "Great Debate" topic.
My mistake! Deepest apologies.

Replies to this message:
 Message 297 by arachnophilia, posted 02-03-2006 5:36 PM crashfrog 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