Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-18-2019 8:37 PM
22 online now:
DrJones*, jar, Theodoric (3 members, 19 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 854,091 Year: 9,127/19,786 Month: 1,549/2,119 Week: 309/576 Day: 112/98 Hour: 4/12


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
161718
19
2021Next
Author Topic:   General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consequtive Consecution Sequel
AdminJar
Inactive Member


Message 271 of 302 (316844)
06-01-2006 12:00 PM
Reply to: Message 270 by Dr Jack
06-01-2006 11:57 AM


Re: 300 post limit
Several reasons. First, the newer software only addressed the member databases, message have not yet been moved over to a formal dB. Second is simply the issue of content. Generaly by the 300 or so post count the thread has either bogged down or taken a new direction. Halting the old gives the opportunity to rethink and refocus the topic.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 270 by Dr Jack, posted 06-01-2006 11:57 AM Dr Jack has not yet responded

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4014 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 272 of 302 (317688)
06-04-2006 5:51 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by AdminJar
02-07-2006 7:36 PM


Black holes and baloney sandwiches...
Well jar, it's hard to compete with that. It is your site and you certainly have the right to decide what is legitimate topically.

That little chapter from an article of mine has evoked thought in many a thinker. It contains many kernels that promote discussion on a number of things, all of which are an essential factor in the concepts debated in this forum.

I must ask, what is the purpose of this forum? Because it appears to many that I have presented staggering challenges to many of the assumptions of a couple of members (you know them better than I).

I am sorry if by condensing the discussion to it's elemental foundation in logic and trimming the branches of abstraction, that so many seem to be left speechless!

What end do you seek in these discussions? Are you promoting 'a view of your own' under the guise of wanting open conversation?

I can see no other explanation as I have yet to hear a response to any of my more poignant commentary by any of the members in question (of which you are now a notable player).

I don't think any of the serious thinkers who visit your forum are going to be impressed by the actions they see. But then again, what fool takes abstractions seriously anyway?

I would very much like to remain a member of this forum and sense my days are numbered if we do not come to some sort of understanding. If you have any suggestions, I would be more than happy to induldge them.

The idea that sermons are not allowed disqualifies anyone claiming to present a 'true' or 'factual' argument in a meaningful context. That pretty much excludes us all. If my analysis is incorrect, please do enlighten me. If not, then perhaps it would serve you better to think deeply on the issues I've raised rather than react so instinctively to protect yourself from a challenge.

I've been in your shoes gentlemen. It is difficult terrain. Bold and treacherous! Please travel with care and mindfulness of the consequences of denial.

I do wish you all well, and apologize for the fire in my words. The topic your playing with is fire, so none of us should be suprised.

I see now that you have censored a couple of my comments. It is an absolute shame in light of intellectual honesty. I guess honesty is pointless to those who presuppose there is no truth to begin with. Though they naturally believe that it's true...

Perhaps now you understand why 'they' crucified Jesus. Because He spoke with the authority that no mere man can claim. 'We' as mankind still crucify Him to this very moment...

John 8: 43-45
...Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me!

Sincerely,

Robert Scott Lockett

Edited by Rob, : No reason given.

Edited by Rob, : Just not wise to leave an address


Any biters in the stream?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by AdminJar, posted 02-07-2006 7:36 PM AdminJar has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 273 by ringo, posted 06-04-2006 6:42 PM Rob has responded
 Message 275 by lfen, posted 06-04-2006 9:06 PM Rob has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 16633
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 273 of 302 (317704)
06-04-2006 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 272 by Rob
06-04-2006 5:51 PM


Re: Black holes and baloney sandwiches...
Rob writes:

If you have any suggestions, I would be more than happy to induldge them.

  1. Trim the length of your posts by 80%.
  2. Trim your attitude by 90%.

Nothing to hide....

So that's your picture in your avatar? :D


Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
This message is a reply to:
 Message 272 by Rob, posted 06-04-2006 5:51 PM Rob has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 274 by Rob, posted 06-04-2006 7:00 PM ringo has not yet responded
 Message 277 by Percy, posted 06-04-2006 9:33 PM ringo has not yet responded

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4014 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 274 of 302 (317712)
06-04-2006 7:00 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by ringo
06-04-2006 6:42 PM


Re: Black holes and baloney sandwiches...
Thanks for that Ringo. I try to speak clearly, and sometimes that necessitates length. I will try.

As for the attitude... It is only perceived. I am a simple truck driver with three kids that my wife thinks I am ignoring because of the time spent with this stuff. I fear her because I respect her.

2 Corinthians 10:1-6
1 By the meekness and gentleness of Christ, I appeal to you--I, Paul, who am "timid" when face to face with you, but "bold" when away! 2 I beg you that when I come I may not have to be as bold as I expect to be toward some people who think that we live by the standards of this world. 3 For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. 4 The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. 5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

Rob


Any biters in the stream?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by ringo, posted 06-04-2006 6:42 PM ringo has not yet responded

  
lfen
Member (Idle past 2842 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 275 of 302 (317729)
06-04-2006 9:06 PM
Reply to: Message 272 by Rob
06-04-2006 5:51 PM


Re: Black holes and baloney sandwiches...
Rob,

I'll give you some feedback that you may find helpful.

Take this:

That little chapter from an article of mine has evoked thought in many a thinker. It contains many kernels that promote discussion on a number of things, all of which are an essential factor in the concepts debated in this forum.

I could click on your name and read through all your posts to see if I could identify "that little chapter" but I won't. Not many others will also. I'll just move along. I've no clue what you are talking about and you've not given any references to help me. What if I were in the orange juice business and I wanted you to buy my oranges juice so I told you, "buy it it's the best!". No one would know what it was or where to find it.

I can see no other explanation as I have yet to hear a response to any of my more poignant commentary by any of the members in question (of which you are now a notable player).

Again there are no references here other than the "you' is identifying jar as a notable player. The little of your comments I've read I never thought were poignant, just religious sentiment that is not that unusual for some of the posters here.

The idea that sermons are not allowed disqualifies anyone claiming to present a 'true' or 'factual' argument in a meaningful context.

Sermons and essays are simply not appropriate to a forum of this kind. What one could do is post them on a website, or a free blog site and then post links.

I'm wondering how long you've lurked here and if you've lurked at other forums? Internet forums have unique issues that require different solutions from classrooms, discussion groups, bars, churches etc. I don't think internet forums are the best place for in depth discussion and if that is what you are looking for I suspect something like classes, bible studies group, etc. might suit you a lot better.

One thing I find useful about these groups for myself is that in trying to express my ideas in writing I clarify them for myself if for no one else.

Each of us finds our own reasons for being here, and sometimes we move on. You have to decide for yourself if you are getting value out of this place.

lfen


This message is a reply to:
 Message 272 by Rob, posted 06-04-2006 5:51 PM Rob has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 276 by Rob, posted 06-04-2006 9:25 PM lfen has not yet responded

Rob 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4014 days)
Posts: 2297
Joined: 06-01-2006


Message 276 of 302 (317737)
06-04-2006 9:25 PM
Reply to: Message 275 by lfen
06-04-2006 9:06 PM


Re: Each of us finds our own reasons for being here...
Some are seeking, some are speaking, and some are weeping. I know why I'm here. But thank you for your genuine concern, it was moving...

Forever learning but never understanding.


Any biters in the stream?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by lfen, posted 06-04-2006 9:06 PM lfen has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18484
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 277 of 302 (317738)
06-04-2006 9:33 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by ringo
06-04-2006 6:42 PM


Re: Black holes and baloney sandwiches...
Ringo writes:

So that's your picture in your avatar? :D

Got curious, found this: "Whiskey" Giclee

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by ringo, posted 06-04-2006 6:42 PM ringo has not yet responded

  
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 3999 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 278 of 302 (318012)
06-05-2006 4:27 PM


Hiding posts
I just wanted to comment that I think the somewhat "new" practice of hiding off-topic posts seems to be working quite well. I freely admit that when the sniping starts I (like many others) always want to have the last word.

I think hiding the off-topic posts works quite well to defuse the personal exchanges.


Legend
Member (Idle past 3171 days)
Posts: 1226
From: Wales, UK
Joined: 05-07-2004


Message 279 of 302 (319075)
06-08-2006 12:22 PM


reply to admin comments
Forum: Post of the Month
Thread: June, 2006, Posts of the Month
Message: Message 5

although my nomination is in no way complementary towards iano, I'd like to clarify that it was never intended as a personal attack or a means of disrespecting him as a poster.

it's just that iano, in one sentence, managed to succintly and definitively explain the following:

how critical analysis, reasoning and common sense are left out of the door when it comes to interpreting the bible.

why it's absolutely pointless trying to reason with a Christian because, when it comes to the crunch, arguments become irrelevant and the bible is always true, because...it just is.

like I said, the fact that it comes from a poster who -in other topics- has demonstrated intelligence, analytical skills and reasoning ability only makes my points above even more pertinent.

{A note from Adminnemooseus: My moderator comments on the message in question can be found here. They concluded with "Bottom line: In my opinion, a problimatic POTM nomination. Maybe it belongs here, maybe it doesn't. I thought the situation called for some admin type comment." I have nothing further to say about this situation.}

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Added Adminnemooseus comment.


"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."
Replies to this message:
 Message 280 by arachnophilia, posted 06-08-2006 1:28 PM Legend has not yet responded

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 143 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 280 of 302 (319103)
06-08-2006 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 279 by Legend
06-08-2006 12:22 PM


Re: reply to admin comments
do we have to AGREE with a post to nominate it? you should be careful, i got suspended once for nominating a post that did nothing but personally insult me. i thought it deserved the nomination because it was very informative of another's viewpoint, and actually quite funny.

the admins disagreed.

it's just that iano, in one sentence, managed to succintly and definitively explain the following:

how critical analysis, reasoning and common sense are left out of the door when it comes to interpreting the bible.

and who's to say that such a view is wrong? what's bad about blind, unfaltering faith? is it an insult to say that someone has faith now?

why it's absolutely pointless trying to reason with a Christian because, when it comes to the crunch, arguments become irrelevant and the bible is always true, because...it just is.

except when it's not, and requires some "interpretation."


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by Legend, posted 06-08-2006 12:22 PM Legend has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 281 by AdminNWR, posted 06-08-2006 2:03 PM arachnophilia has responded

AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 281 of 302 (319129)
06-08-2006 2:03 PM
Reply to: Message 280 by arachnophilia
06-08-2006 1:28 PM


Re: reply to admin comments
do we have to AGREE with a post to nominate it?

No, it is not necessary that you agree. However, the nomination should express why the message deserves nomination. It should not express why you disagree with it, though it is okay to mention that you disagree.

I had similar reservations to those expressed by Adminnemooseus in Message 5. The problem was not that iano's message was nominated, nor that Legend disagreed with the nominated messaage. The problem was with using "a classic example of a blind, unfaltering, dogmatic mindset" in that nomination message. If, instead, it had said "a clear expression of a creationist viewpoint" there would have been no criticism.


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

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 280 by arachnophilia, posted 06-08-2006 1:28 PM arachnophilia has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 282 by iano, posted 06-09-2006 10:29 AM AdminNWR has not yet responded
     Message 283 by arachnophilia, posted 06-09-2006 10:34 AM AdminNWR has responded
     Message 287 by Adminnemooseus, posted 06-09-2006 11:31 AM AdminNWR has not yet responded

    iano
    Member (Idle past 106 days)
    Posts: 6165
    From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
    Joined: 07-27-2005


    Message 282 of 302 (319498)
    06-09-2006 10:29 AM
    Reply to: Message 281 by AdminNWR
    06-08-2006 2:03 PM


    Re: reply to admin comments
    "a clear expression of a creationist viewpoint" there would have been no criticism.

    If the nominator happened to be the person to whom the the nominated message was replying, would the clarity be expected to be so very clear?

    Ropey use of the PotM system? I think so, especially if the (even if modified as above) motivation for nomination supplies an analysis of the PotM'ed statement which doesn't take into account the context of the message to which it was replying to (which the nominator wrote himself so is presumably aware of what he wrote)

    We'll be nominating ourselves next :)


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 281 by AdminNWR, posted 06-08-2006 2:03 PM AdminNWR has not yet responded

    arachnophilia
    Member (Idle past 143 days)
    Posts: 9069
    From: god's waiting room
    Joined: 05-21-2004


    Message 283 of 302 (319500)
    06-09-2006 10:34 AM
    Reply to: Message 281 by AdminNWR
    06-08-2006 2:03 PM


    Re: reply to admin comments
    If, instead, it had said "a clear expression of a creationist viewpoint" there would have been no criticism.

    so it's not the act itself, just the phrasing of it?


    אָרַח

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 281 by AdminNWR, posted 06-08-2006 2:03 PM AdminNWR has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 284 by AdminNWR, posted 06-09-2006 10:44 AM arachnophilia has responded

    AdminNWR
    Inactive Member


    Message 284 of 302 (319504)
    06-09-2006 10:44 AM
    Reply to: Message 283 by arachnophilia
    06-09-2006 10:34 AM


    Re: reply to admin comments
    so it's not the act itself, just the phrasing of it?

    The phrasing is part of the act itself. A POTM nomination is supposed to be a positive statement about a post, so negative comments don't belong in the nomination.


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

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 283 by arachnophilia, posted 06-09-2006 10:34 AM arachnophilia has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 285 by Legend, posted 06-09-2006 11:09 AM AdminNWR has not yet responded
     Message 289 by arachnophilia, posted 06-09-2006 11:37 AM AdminNWR has not yet responded

    Legend
    Member (Idle past 3171 days)
    Posts: 1226
    From: Wales, UK
    Joined: 05-07-2004


    Message 285 of 302 (319514)
    06-09-2006 11:09 AM
    Reply to: Message 284 by AdminNWR
    06-09-2006 10:44 AM


    Re: reply to admin comments
    quote:
    A POTM nomination is supposed to be a positive statement about a post, so negative comments don't belong in the nomination

    I wasn't aware of that. I thought that a POTM is one that stands out for whatever reason and for me iano's post really stood out as it captured the essence of a fundamentalist mindset.

    I'd be happy to retract the nomination if you can tell me the best way to do it (delete / strikeout ?)


    "In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."
    This message is a reply to:
     Message 284 by AdminNWR, posted 06-09-2006 10:44 AM AdminNWR has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 286 by iano, posted 06-09-2006 11:19 AM Legend has responded

    RewPrev1
    ...
    161718
    19
    2021Next
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.0 Beta
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019