|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consequtive Consecution Sequel | |||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
If you're going into this with eyes open, and in particular if you have some discussion style/approach ideas you'd like to try out for bringing a problem poster closer to constructive discussion, then I lean toward being encouraging. My biggest problem I see is that the thread started just to review age dating with 'relative'/simple is at 73 posts and counting, and very little of it has to do with the bristlecone pine data because 'relative'/simple is off and running on one of his pet illusions. While a {great debate} format would not prevent him from introducing plethoras of imaginary scenarios, it would limit the divergence from the topic at hand as other posters take on those fantasies. My original idea was to proceed similar to the grand canyon thread by jar (that I have yet to finish, as enjoyable as it is), though not necessarily in a strict linear fashion. we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 6.9 |
We're pretty sure it's Simple
If it is simple (which i don't doubt) and he has bypassed his suspension by creating a new ID then isn't another suspension in order based on this act alone? I'm sure this is an issue you mods have been discussing amongst yourselves but I had to ask. This message has been edited by DrJones*, 05-06-2006 12:28 AM Just a monkey in a long line of kings. If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! *not an actual doctor
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
I, at least for now, would prefer to not discuss the details of this situation, other than in the "Private Administration Forum". I suspect the other admins feel the same.
Right now, the membership should be aware that to debate with Simple/Relative is to debate with someone who has a substantial history of being a forum problem. If you now find Simple/Relative to be a problem, then just don't get involved with debating him. Or something like that. Adminnemooseus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
It's not just relative. As you hint, if no one answered him there would be no problem ... it's more like:
... where k is a constant dependant on the number of Dryas octopetala blooms at any time you chose. we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Belfry Member (Idle past 5114 days) Posts: 177 From: Ocala, FL Joined: |
I totally understand being chided about an off-topic post (re: Evolution Simplified: Message 38), and I acknowledge and apologize for that.
However, I felt unecessarily singled out by Adminmooseus' wording of "OFF TOPIC. WAY OFF TOPIC. WAY, WAY OFF TOPIC," in the moderator comment. I was, after all, only responding to an ongoing off-topic subthread of posts (11 posts before mine) - none of which received any warning whatsoever. Not a big deal, I'm just saying Moose could have just stuck with the standard "OFF TOPIC, DO NOT RESPOND," under the circumstances. Figured I'd bring my comment to the appropriate board.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
Although I usually find Moose's comments more acerbic than necessary, I don't feel that it is the case here. It appears to me to be an injection of humor, and not necessarily in way meant to be demeaning or insulting. At least, that is how I read it.
And as far as feeling picked on, you seem to just have had the bad luck of being the last one to post when Moose noticed this particular subthread.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Belfry Member (Idle past 5114 days) Posts: 177 From: Ocala, FL Joined: |
Chiroptera writes:
Fair enough. I'm probably being overly sensitive. I had been resisting the terrible urge to respond to the initial off-topic post on the topic, expecting to see an admin message show up on it, and then other people (some of whom have Alter Egos with super powers) kept responding to it... so I gave in to my urge, and paid the price.
And as far as feeling picked on, you seem to just have had the bad luck of being the last one to post when Moose noticed this particular subthread.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
By the way, I do know how you feel. There have been several instances where I just happened to be the last one to respond to an off-topic and so had the "Do not respond" warning attached to my post. It seems natural enough to wonder why it was my post that finally earned the warning.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
BMG Member (Idle past 237 days) Posts: 357 From: Southwestern U.S. Joined: |
Belfry writes: I had been resisting the terrible urge to respond to the initial off-topic post on the topic, expecting to see an admin message show up on it, and then other people...kept responding to it...so I gave in to my urge, and paid the price. Hi Belfry. That's my fault, obviously. I seem to be unable to put together a coherent post. The point I was trying to make was that I was, previously, debating with my brother on the credibility of evolution. I noted, to my brother, that evolution is usually a gradual process that takes millions upon millions of years, and the fossil record is strong support of this. He responded that dating techniques were flawed and unreliable; that the fossils which were claimed to be millions of years old was a farce; that the earth couldn't be 4.6 or so billion years old. He used the hydrogen rebuttal as support for his assertion. I was merely asking whether anyone had previously heard of this claim before. Whether my post was on/off topic I didn't know, hence the reason for my asking the question "Is this post even on topic". Again, I apologize for my inability to provide a clear and coherent post, and for being the catalyst of your indignation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Belfry Member (Idle past 5114 days) Posts: 177 From: Ocala, FL Joined: |
LOL, definitely not your fault, Infixion. You see, I knew it was off-topic, and I responded anyway. And then I let an innocuous admin remark get to me (to my current chagrin - if I'd waited a few minutes, I would have let it pass with a rueful grin).
Personally, I wouldn't mind if there was enough flexibility in the On-Topic guidelines to allow a side issue like the one you raised, particularly in a thread with a topic title as broad as "evolution simplified." But, given the way things tend to snowball in EvC debates, the reticence of the admins to allow it is warranted. Shouting matches are rarely seen here, in comparison to other boards I frequent.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
There has been some discussion (here and up thread) that member brianforbes is another incarnation of member simple. After investigations by our crack "tracking simple" staff, it has been concluded that there is stong evidence to support that such is not the case.
Despite whatever posting style simularities that may exist, the conclusion is that brianforbes IS NOT simple. This message should conclude any discussion of that matter. Adminnemooseus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
You want to go ahead and promote that thread by Faith about faith? Some are interested.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
JavaMan Member (Idle past 2347 days) Posts: 475 From: York, England Joined: |
Can we have robinrohan's proposal to discuss in the Coffee House? He's a long-running, active member - shouldn't we listen to his complaint?
The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNWR Inactive Member |
Can we have robinrohan's proposal to discuss in the Coffee House?
Promoted. See The problem with EVC. To comment on moderation procedures or respond to admin messages:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
Those who have the courage to argue about things they know little about must accept that uninformed ideas will be given short shrift What is it that I know little about?
Edited by AdminJar, : off topic for the thread
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024