General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 12.0

Yet another continuation of the theme.The previous versions, from first to last: Change in Moderation?
General discussion of moderation procedures
General discussion of moderation procedures: The Sequel
General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consecution
General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consequtive Consecution
General discussion of moderation procedures: The Consequtive Consecution Sequel
General discussion of moderation procedures - Part 7
General discussion of moderation procedures - Part
General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 9.0
General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 10.0
General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 11.0Adminnemooseus

What would you suggest for the new title?Adminnemooseus

This whole "Gap Theory" is outside of my realm. I would prefer that another admin more in touch with such enter an opinion and/or do any topic title change.Perhaps because of the topic title question, the topic as a whole is terminally flawed. As such, perhaps it's best closed.Other admins?AdminnemooseusEdited by Adminnemooseus, : Change ID's.

I agree. Topic in question moved to here in the "Bible Study" forum. One quibble - Your message should have gone to the Considerations of topic promotions from the Proposed New Topics forumConsiderations of topic promotions from the Proposed New Topics forumEdited by Adminnemooseus, : Fix dBcode. Should have used the "preview" feature.

There was (as PaulK/AdminPaul already knows) a fair amount of discussion of this matter, in the "Private Administration Forum", more or less concluding here.AdminBuzzsaw has posted his summary here, at the "Angelic and Demonic Possessions" topic.Case closed.Adminnemooseus

Note: This is in reference to http://EvC Forum: Polystrata fossils -->EvC Forum: Polystrata fossils I suspected such, but didn't feel like going searching for it. Regardless, I think it is also good and proper that it be credited/referenced in your message.Thank you,
Adminnemooseus

Jar, I find that I must agree with both you and AdminBuz.Yes, your comment does pertain to moderation procedures and thus is proper for this topic.Some variation of it, however, has become your your standard message in this topic, more or less repeated whenever someone of the evolution side is suspended. Yes, the uneven or seeming uneven moderation treatment of evolutionists and creationists is a reality in this forum. And yes, it should be discussed.But I think it merits its own topic in the Suggestions and Questions forum. This is because it is such a specialized issue AND because it is a distraction from the discussion of other moderation issues.So, please do start a new "Uneven Moderation of Evolutionists and Creationists" topic. If you can come up with a better title, go for it.Right now, I think any further discussion of such, in this topic, is itself cause for suspension. I'm sure you would like it, that you are being held to such higher standards. Case closed in this topic.Adminnemooseus

Thank you for starting the new topic, Moderation Procedures to level the playing field. Had you done such when I suggested such back in message 89 a lot of trouble could have been avoided.I offhand have little to say on the matter of the suspension, beyond what I said at the "Suspensions and Bannings Part II" topic.One thing I will say, it that it is my impression that you rather blatantly quote mined my message 89, in your message 99. You focused in on one sentence and disregarded what was said on either side.Adminnemooseus

Had you started the new topic then, per my suggestion, the suspension and all the Jar / Adminnemooseus discussion between that message 89 and this current message would not have happened. Instead you chose to argue that the theme now in the new topic did belong in this topic. And etc.AdminnemooseusEdited by Adminnemooseus, : Change ID.

I was about the use the "hide" code, which would render all of the message invisible other than via the "peek" mode. But then I wondered if it be best that the message remain free of any "edited by an admin" message. As such there is evidence that there was no admin tampering with the message - There can be no charge of a frame up.Adminnemooseus

If anyone wants to further debate what an ad hominem, it better be in a specialized topic and not in the version 13 of the "General Discussion..." topic. Likewise for any other specialized type focuses.Adminnemooseus