Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8945 total)
35 online now:
Newest Member: ski zawaski
Post Volume: Total: 865,187 Year: 20,223/19,786 Month: 620/2,023 Week: 128/392 Day: 41/87 Hour: 6/8


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 10.0
kuresu
Member (Idle past 824 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 151 of 305 (395768)
04-17-2007 8:25 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by RAZD
04-17-2007 8:13 PM


Re: Suspension over soon, but ...
Ned has told him, I've told him, and now you are telling him. what? to start his own thread on his view over morality.

I agree with what you say.

Let me further point out--Rob was suspended for being off-topic. Not because he was actually making a point against abiogenesis and we in our ivory towers couldn't stand that (this is directed toward's Hoot Mon). I repeat--he was off-topic with the vast majority of his posts in that thread, and had been suspended multiple times for the same repetitive offence. He is not a martyr, he is not being crucified, he is not being silenced.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by RAZD, posted 04-17-2007 8:13 PM RAZD has not yet responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3908
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 152 of 305 (395804)
04-17-2007 11:14 PM
Reply to: Message 149 by Nuggin
04-17-2007 12:54 PM


Re: Topic Nazis
Nuggin writes:

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.

Fighting off-topic blather with off-topic blather?

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.

You and ArchArchitect had already posted a series of irrelevant messages. I choose to give you both credit for knowing if you are posting quality on-topic material. I decided you both were choosing not to do such. As such, the topic was getting thrashed. What was I to do? Post a message saying "The last bunch of messages are garbage. I'll give you a final 10 minutes to post your final garbage, then I'm closing the topic."

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.

Acting upon topics gone bad is absolutely an admins job.

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.

See above, two comments back.

How would you like it if I posted this, then killed this thread so you couldn't respond to explain your position?

I'm under no obligation to THERE give you a place for further off-topic messages, to explain why your previous messages were off-topic. This topic (General Discussion...) is the place for such. That's why I have a link to this topic in my "signature", and why I usually specifically guide people to that link.

Adminnemooseus, at the topic in question writes:

Need to reply to this message? Find an appropriate topic in the links listed below.

Moderation messages tend not to work well. They tend to either not be seen or not be seen soon enough, or be seen but ignored. The type moderation message that can't be missed or ignored is a topic closure.

I sometimes work on the philosophy "A tap on the shoulder doesn't work. Sometimes you have to hit them up side the head with a brick". Or something like that.

Adminnemooseus

ps: I'll also quote RAZD's message 150, to try to keep it from being buried. That situation is something else we need to deal with:

RAZD, in message 150 writes:

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?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by Nuggin, posted 04-17-2007 12:54 PM Nuggin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by Nuggin, posted 04-18-2007 1:15 AM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 803 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 153 of 305 (395830)
04-18-2007 1:15 AM
Reply to: Message 152 by Adminnemooseus
04-17-2007 11:14 PM


Re: Topic Nazis
Fighting off-topic blather with off-topic blather?

Its called demonstrating. Arch was siting a completely unfounded and made up quote attributed to "a scientist". I was showing him that ANYONE can make up any quote and attribute it to anyone at any time.

It's true that I EXPECTED Arch to realize what I was doing A WHOLE LOT sooner than he did. I can't help it if he was slow to catch on.

You'll note that when he finally did catch on, my post was explaining the point of the previous series of posts.

You'll be able to find that post as it's directly in between your two posts. Luckily I managed to squeeze it in in the 30 seconds you alotted. Very generous


This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Adminnemooseus, posted 04-17-2007 11:14 PM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 154 by ringo, posted 04-18-2007 1:56 AM Nuggin has responded

ringo
Member
Posts: 17510
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 154 of 305 (395838)
04-18-2007 1:56 AM
Reply to: Message 153 by Nuggin
04-18-2007 1:15 AM


Re: Topic Nazis
Nuggin writes:

It's true that I EXPECTED Arch to realize what I was doing A WHOLE LOT sooner than he did. I can't help it if he was slow to catch on.

Speaking of "slow to catch on", ever hear of cutting your losses?


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 153 by Nuggin, posted 04-18-2007 1:15 AM Nuggin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by Nuggin, posted 04-18-2007 2:10 AM ringo has not yet responded

Nuggin
Member (Idle past 803 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 155 of 305 (395839)
04-18-2007 2:10 AM
Reply to: Message 154 by ringo
04-18-2007 1:56 AM


Re: Topic Nazis
Well thanks so much for chiming in Ringo. I'm so glad you were a part of the original conversation as well as this one.

It's great to see that there are still people here who don't want to just ride in, snipe and ride out.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by ringo, posted 04-18-2007 1:56 AM ringo has not yet responded

AdminQuetzal
Inactive Member


Message 156 of 305 (395876)
04-18-2007 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 149 by Nuggin
04-17-2007 12:54 PM


Re: Topic Nazis
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.

An admirable intent. Perhaps trying to accomplish the same goal in the context of the actual topic might avoid similar problems in the future. Since you knew you were off-topic - you've been around long enough to know what that means - your reasoning here becomes weaker, don't you think?

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.

It's a fool's game to attempt to second-guess another admin. Moose has explained what happened and why there was such a short timespan between warning and closure. Would I have done the same thing? Probably not - I'd have just closed the topic for a cooling off since the messages were passing between you two pretty quickly. After all, you had exchanged some ten messages in a relatively short span of time (actually 18 messages between 12:18 am and 1:07 am), absolutely NONE of which were on topic - on a thread which had been inactive for a month.

Please DO continue to try and educate the newbies. Just do it in the context of the thread in question.

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.

Actually, I would say that this is a pretty fair description of what admins on EvCForum are supposed to do. We should NOT use admin mode in any thread where we ARE actively participating. And it isn't a question of "disagreeing with the discussion". It's a question of trying to maintain civility and focus on an active board with a wide variety of posters, styles and topics. Just keeping track of active threads is a challenge.

How would you like it if I posted this, then killed this thread so you couldn't respond to explain your position?

Feel free to disagree with and challenge admin actions. Sometimes we even reverse decisions based on member feedback in this and related threads. That's what the General Discussion of Moderation Procedures, etc, is for. In this particular case, however, I don't think your argument is a good one - you were blatantly off topic; you knew you were blatantly off topic; you continued to post off topic for numerous posts. Would you have stopped if an admin had posted a warning, or would you have wanted to get your last licks in?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by Nuggin, posted 04-17-2007 12:54 PM Nuggin has not yet responded

Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16107
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 157 of 305 (396077)
04-18-2007 8:10 PM


Just Promote ArchArchitect's Topic Already
It seems clear enough, now I want to jump up and down on it yodelling.

Replies to this message:
 Message 158 by AdminPD, posted 04-19-2007 7:52 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded
 Message 159 by AdminSchraf, posted 04-19-2007 8:13 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 158 of 305 (396219)
04-19-2007 7:52 AM
Reply to: Message 157 by Dr Adequate
04-18-2007 8:10 PM


Re: Just Promote ArchArchitect's Topic Already
If you are talking about Where Science And The Bible Meet surely you can contain your yodeling until the originator has time to refine the OP, which does need work.

ArchArchitect is a new member and if promoted, that would be his first originated thread on this board.

I ask that if and when it is promoted, you jump gently and argue constructively.

So please be patient and allow AA the time to present the best OP possible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-18-2007 8:10 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

AdminSchraf
Inactive Member


Message 159 of 305 (396223)
04-19-2007 8:13 AM
Reply to: Message 157 by Dr Adequate
04-18-2007 8:10 PM


Re: Just Promote ArchArchitect's Topic Already
quote:
It seems clear enough, now I want to jump up and down on it yodelling.

It's not clear enough for me, and that's saying something.

You'll get to jump soon enough.

Edited by AdminSchraf, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-18-2007 8:10 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by PaulK, posted 04-19-2007 8:36 AM AdminSchraf has not yet responded

PaulK
Member
Posts: 15534
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 160 of 305 (396225)
04-19-2007 8:36 AM
Reply to: Message 159 by AdminSchraf
04-19-2007 8:13 AM


Re: Just Promote ArchArchitect's Topic Already
I think that it isn't worth promoting at present. Either he doesn't understand how to make a rational argument or it's hopelessly obscure.
(I think it's the former but he should be given the chance to rewrite the post before we assume it's total nonsense).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by AdminSchraf, posted 04-19-2007 8:13 AM AdminSchraf has not yet responded

graft2vine
Member (Idle past 3266 days)
Posts: 139
Joined: 07-27-2006


Message 161 of 305 (396253)
04-19-2007 11:35 AM


Image and likeness is on-topic
www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=1&t=364&m=77#77 -->www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=1&t=364&m=77#77">http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=1&t=364&m=77#77

This post was labeled off-topic and I was wondering the reason for it. It deals with the difference between image and likeness which was part of my opening point:

10. Man made male and female, Eve created. Man made in the image of God. (note: there is a difference between image and likeness)

Edited by graft2vine, : corrected link


Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by AdminPD, posted 04-19-2007 1:14 PM graft2vine has responded

AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 162 of 305 (396271)
04-19-2007 1:14 PM
Reply to: Message 161 by graft2vine
04-19-2007 11:35 AM


Re: Image and likeness is on-topic
The point of your topic is that Adam was created on Day 3. You veered off into the NT and didn't clearly explain what the difference in likeness or image has to do with Adam being created on Day 3.

Also remember that your thread is in the Science Forum and per the rules: Points should be supported with evidence and/or reasoned argumentation.

You state:

He was made in the image of the earth and the likeness of the heavens.

But gave no evidence or support of that statement or what it has to do with the creation of Adam.

From what I could tell your post made no point relative to the topic.

Most of your posts in this thread almost give an answer. Please try to provide some clear support for your position concerning Adam being created on the 3rd day.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by graft2vine, posted 04-19-2007 11:35 AM graft2vine has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by graft2vine, posted 04-19-2007 1:46 PM AdminPD has not yet responded

graft2vine
Member (Idle past 3266 days)
Posts: 139
Joined: 07-27-2006


Message 163 of 305 (396278)
04-19-2007 1:46 PM
Reply to: Message 162 by AdminPD
04-19-2007 1:14 PM


Re: Image and likeness is on-topic
I will repost my response with more support.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by AdminPD, posted 04-19-2007 1:14 PM AdminPD has not yet responded

Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 2304 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 164 of 305 (397676)
04-27-2007 4:09 AM


ESG
If Phat is going to set up his own little exclusive party (ESG)within EvC, controlling debate, shouldn`t it be moved to the zoo---oops---Showcase?

Replies to this message:
 Message 165 by Adminnemooseus, posted 04-27-2007 4:31 AM Nighttrain has not yet responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3908
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 165 of 305 (397677)
04-27-2007 4:31 AM
Reply to: Message 164 by Nighttrain
04-27-2007 4:09 AM


Re: ESG
Re: www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=6&t=684&m=1 -->www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=6&t=684&m=1">http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=6&t=684&m=1

I like the idea of have some limited participation topics such as the one Phat started. It should be interesting for the non-participants to look in at.

Putting it into the "Showcase" had occurred to me. But instead, I, in the "Private Administration Forum", have proposed that it go to the "Great Debate" forum. There it will be tagged "Evangelical Christians Only".

Another possibility is that we could create another new forum, with participation filtered like at the "Showcase". Probably not a good idea - It would just create more clutter.

Adminnemooseus


This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Nighttrain, posted 04-27-2007 4:09 AM Nighttrain has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by Admin, posted 04-27-2007 7:50 AM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019