General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 10.0

I respectfully ask the admins to allow Rob to continue posting his ideas in this thread without being warned or censored. Can't you see the tactic he's been using?Everytime there's a science thread that he's interested enough to say something about it, he declares himself to be an expert in such topic and then you folks censored him, giving lurkers the impression that you are sencoring him for his "dangerous" cosmic wisdom. I for one would like to see what he has to offer in regard to the topic. For example, while trying to bring morality into string and M-theory is obviously off topic, I think we should at least allow him to explain what M-theory has to do with morality.I really appreciate you guys working hard to keep people on topic, but at the same time you are playing right into his cards.

---

Disclaimer:

​

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

​

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

If you want to discuss morality and M Theory with him then open a thread for that purpose. The OP seemed to be asking an honest question about the science behind the topic. That will be dragged way off course by Rob's nonsense.

I don't agree. The OP in that thread asks people if M theory is valid or not and why. Rob said that it's not a valid theory because it undermines morality. I know it's a long shot, but I'm sure Rob has an explanation to (1) what M theory has to do with morality and (2) why undermining morality makes a theory invalid.

---

Disclaimer:

​

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

​

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

While Showcase might be the EvC equivalent of 'the rubber room' with inmates free to work through their fantasies, I question the influence of 'propaganda' on young and enguiring minds. When impressionable lurkers see the nonsense being dispersed without challenge because the inmates control the roster, it must tend to reinforce the validity of arguments presented there. While we hope the info from Showcase might be balanced by a wander through the more balanced sections of EvC, with our time limited by the demands of life outside the forum, it might be a case of 'that sounds reasonable', 'the evos really are evil',or 'engaged in a suppression conspiracy', or whatever passes for the latest in Delusionland. We only have a limited window to straighten out visitors with reliable information, so why leaven the lump with nonsense?

Folks, consider this in Message 153: AdminNosy sends Rob to the cloakroom for 6 hours after the poor boy is forced to defend himself in Message 153 from Chiroptera's chipping at him and calling him a "dick": Why didn't Chiro get suspended instead? This seems arbitrary and capricious to me. There's a lot of elitist Admin attitude around here that I don't understand. Lotsa fiery egos flaming with impunity. Not nearly enough cool guys like me.”HM

I have to admit, I was somewhat surprised to see Rob suspended when he was replying to my post.But I didn't want to say anything and have Ned think I was picking on him today, seeing how I have already commented on something with which he was involved earlier today.That said, I do find it typical of Rob's lack of clarity that I can't really figure out exactly what Rob was complaining about, only that he was complaining.

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

Rob wasn't suspended for any impolite remarks that he made. You and he seemed about even on that.Rob was suspended for the reasons given:
He will not stay on topic and he can not read replies to him and he doesn't take the trouble to construct a logical reply.Edited by AdminNosy, : change author

It is a social issue, and part of the problem is the religious/anti-science thinking on the part of some of the opponents of stem cell research, notably the president. "Social Issues ..." is the nearest forum I could think of.I hadn't considered the Coffee House though. I'm fine with your decision.

not sure if this is the right thread.I'm asking for rob's suspension. his first post in the thread Abiogenesis , Message 167 after his last suspension of 6 hours is completely off-topic.It would appear that the previous one's did no good. Not sure if an even longer one will, but I'm asking for it.Edited by kuresu, : No reason given.Edited by kuresu, : No reason given.

Hey admins,While I agree that we want strings to be "topic related" in general, there has to be room for discussion here.Posting a "warning" and closing an active thread in the course of 2 minutes is a little too goose steppy, don't you think?

You got Moosed.

Re: EvC Forum: Chemical Evolution Sorry about it taking so long. I had to take the time to do an edit to change my ID at message 72. Also, the server seems to have been responding slowly. Message 72 was originally intended to the topic closing message. I felt I needed to post message 74 because of message 73's having snuck in there.Looking back through the messages posted at the topic in question, I must confess that I did find a barest of connections to the theme of the topic in one of the messages. Other than that, all the messages were totally off-topic. They weren't even good off-topic messages.Adminnemooseus

Hey Nuggin.I completely concur with the Moose closing that topic. That was one of the worst examples of off-topic nonsense I've seen in a while. If I'd caught it before Moose, I'd have slammed the door as well.

I'll respond on 2 points:1) Yes, we were off topic. I was trying to show a new comer to the boards WHY you can't just make up random quotes.2) My issue is not that there was a problem with us being offtopic, it's that between "Hey you guys are off topic" and "I'm closing this thread" there wasn't even enough time to respond. I know, because I was typing in a response and couldn't post it.Thats draconian.Admin's jobs are not to shut down active threads in which they are not participating because they disagree with the discussion that's happening there.If people are off topic, post "Hey you are off topic, please get back on topic or start a new thread". Don't just storm in and kill everything.How would you like it if I posted this, then killed this thread so you couldn't respond to explain your position?

Soon Rob's 24 hour suspension - his 3rd in a row on the same issue - will be up, and we will see if he can stick to a topic without going off on a Rob-tangent.I'd like to see Rob get a new topic started on his issue of morality, stated concisely with no reference to other threads, where he can lay out his position and then defend it. This gives others a chance to debate with him about it without ALSO being off topic on any other thread.I also think that if he keeps harping on this morality issue on any thread he posts on, that this is no different than randman's recapitulating rants on raised Haeckels: what is the criteria for showcase?Time will tell eh?

---

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.