General discussion of moderation procedures - Part 7

Hey rand, one suggestion: simply remove any mention of the following three words from any post: "Pakicetus", "Haeckle", "fraud". After all, even Percy won't suspend you just for being irritating. Oh, wait...

I have to say, Percy, that I was disappointed to log in this morning and find that the conversation with randman on the Ancient Bacteria thread, albeit tantamount to chasing my own tail, was abruptly terminated by the expedient of consigning rand to the Showcase forum.I wish to register my disagreement with this moderator action. I am aware that rand is a "problem poster" in many ways, but I strongly disagree he is in anywhere near the same class as Ray or JAD. In other words, although he is irritating and single-minded, and can be frustratingly deliberately obtuse, being sentenced to oblivion is punishment that doesn't fit the crime, in my opinion.What is conceivably worse, again in my opinion, for the integrity of this forum is that he can - justifiably or not - proclaim that he was silenced while "winning" the debate, simply because he was "winning". Whereas I had already indicated intent to stop my participating in that thread, my hope had been that others with more knowledge of the subject would be willing and able to continue the discussion to some sort of closure. It may not have been possible with rand himself, but certainly a more knowledgeable member would have been able to better explain the issues that I had been. With rand jailed in the showcase, that is no longer possible.Anyway, just wanted to let you know I disagree with the action, and would ask you to reconsider.

And at least three participants either suspended or threatened with suspension? The last post with anything resembling discussion occurred on page 3 - the last four pages have been three people beating on each other in a sophmorish "he said/she said" or "did not/did too" fashion. I don't give a rat's patootie whether those three individuals can't stand each other or not. I WOULD have enjoyed reading a factual discussion about the film - what's presented, how, what's left out. I haven't seen it - and I guarantee I didn't learn anything about it from that thread. Pity the grownups haven't stepped in to put paid to the little menage a trois going on.

Yes ma'am, the thread begun by ohnai was indeed the one I was whining about. I think that was also the one crash was referring to.

All very well and good, crash. I thought that all three of you should have been suspended in that thread (ohnai's). You've all been around more than long enough to know that tu quoque is neither a valid defense nor a valid form of argument. I brought the issue up originally here in the moderation forum because it was beyond my comprehension why the admins allowed any of you to get away with it. "Be careful what you wish for" is not a bad adage for you in this instance: if it'd been me, you'd all have been gone.

As jar noted, I wasn't an admin at the time. By the time I was an admin, Purple had already taken it in tow. If it makes you feel better, it was that particular thread (and my whining about it to anyone who would sit still long enough) that caused my recent change in status. So I guess I owe you (and holmes and mangy) either thanks or curses depending on how things work out.So, provisionally, thank you. And remember - "Big Brother is watching" .