Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
9 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 12.0
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 91 of 199 (421885)
09-14-2007 10:08 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by jar
09-14-2007 8:13 PM


Re: Take It Elsewhere
Just a hint: this is the right place to discuss moderation procedures and the fact that AdminBuzsaw can't understand that simply supports my contention that we should not try to hold Biblical Christians to the same standards as evolutionists.
jar, there were no creationists in the discussion that got brenna suspended, so the uneven standards point is kind of a non-sequitor.
and your ad-hominem against buzsaw is uncalled for. as an evilutionist you should know better


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by jar, posted 09-14-2007 8:13 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by jar, posted 09-14-2007 10:14 PM arachnophilia has not replied
 Message 93 by macaroniandcheese, posted 09-14-2007 10:39 PM arachnophilia has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 92 of 199 (421887)
09-14-2007 10:14 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by arachnophilia
09-14-2007 10:08 PM


Re: Take It Elsewhere
Well if anything I have said is considered an attack on the individual I sincerely apologize. My intent is simply to try to allow everyone to have an opportunity to present the best defense of their position that is possible.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by arachnophilia, posted 09-14-2007 10:08 PM arachnophilia has not replied

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 93 of 199 (421894)
09-14-2007 10:39 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by arachnophilia
09-14-2007 10:08 PM


Re: Take It Elsewhere
there were no creationists in the discussion that got brenna suspended
i agree. it was more an issue of the thing that should have been settled two years ago when percy said that forum guidelines in no way require proper capitalization. i would suggest that style complaints should be ruled off-topic unless they really, really cause inability to be read like giant fucking sparkles or navy blue text on the navy blue background.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by arachnophilia, posted 09-14-2007 10:08 PM arachnophilia has not replied

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 94 of 199 (421897)
09-14-2007 10:56 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by Adminnemooseus
09-14-2007 10:03 PM


Re: Adminnemooseus thinks it should have a topic of its own
i know admin wording is final and all -- but, uh, this is the place to dispute moderator actions. and disputing your "move it to another thread" action does belong here.
Edited by arachnophilia, : grammar mistake


This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Adminnemooseus, posted 09-14-2007 10:03 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 95 of 199 (421899)
09-14-2007 11:08 PM


in re suspension of jar
it seems to me that the title "General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures" should be open to any discussion of moderation procedure. the "12.0" part should express that this thread has been through many incarnations and is more than able to contain any number of topics of various breadths.
i'd just like to express my displeasure at moose throwing his own weight around. a discussion between admins in a moderation procedure thread shouldn't be able to be acted on by one of the admins engaged in the discussion. this isn't the first time i've seen this kind of behavior from moose, or the first time i've made this suggestion either.
Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.

i'm not going to capitalize my posts, get better eyes.

Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 96 of 199 (421900)
09-14-2007 11:34 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by macaroniandcheese
09-14-2007 6:11 PM


Re: brenna's suspension
bren writes:
that's nice.
florida law actually does protect self defense, though. just so you know.
The self defense thing simply mean you got a slap on the wrist (which was pretty much what you got) rather than some spankings.

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!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by macaroniandcheese, posted 09-14-2007 6:11 PM macaroniandcheese has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 97 of 199 (421916)
09-15-2007 1:06 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by AdminPD
09-13-2007 4:29 PM


Re: To AdminPD regarding the "ramifications of omnipotence for God" thread
AdminPD responds to me:
quote:
Would you rather I change the action and ding you two for going in circles and not moving the discussion forward?
Here's a thought: Keep out of it. You had nothing to contribute and your comment was vague at best. Wait until an actual problem arises rather than jumping the gun.
Besides, isn't that what I directly said to pbee? Twice? You're going to ding me for trying to stop what you were trying to stop? Only you are allowed to stop a thread?
quote:
The goal was to break the circle before it devolved into more personal and less topic.
Can you suggest a generic statement more suited for that purpose?
Um, how about being direct?
"As dropping an accusation of bigotry will bring the topic to a screeching halt, even if it is only a perceived accusation, I suggest y'all let that part of the conversation go."

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by AdminPD, posted 09-13-2007 4:29 PM AdminPD has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by AdminNem, posted 09-15-2007 4:03 PM Rrhain has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 98 of 199 (421957)
09-15-2007 7:19 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by Adminnemooseus
09-14-2007 10:03 PM


Re: Adminnemooseus thinks it should have a topic of its own
quote:
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.
Actually, Jar most often objects when a Creationist member is suspended.
His "standard message" is to say that we shouldn't suspend them because you can't expect good behavior from them the way you can from the science-minded folks. He also says that we need to allow them to display their bad behavior so that all can see the contrast between the groups.
I think that you get a bee in your bonnet about certain members and that you also get punishment-happy, to echo what others here have said.
Edited by nator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Adminnemooseus, posted 09-14-2007 10:03 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 99 of 199 (421978)
09-15-2007 11:17 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by Adminnemooseus
09-14-2007 10:03 PM


Re: Adminnemooseus thinks it should have a topic of its own
Adminnemooseus writes:
Yes, your comment does pertain to moderation procedures and thus is proper for this topic.
Yet when I reply asking a simple question, "So the thread for discussing moderation procedures is not the place to discuss moderation procedures?", your response was to suspend me.
You also suggested a new thread to discuss the issue I have raised, and a threat to suspend anyone discussing that issue.
There was Message 90 where I asked a general question trying to get you to clarify your dictum in Message 89 and Message 92 where I simply pointed out that I try very hard never to address or attack personalities but only address messages and behavior.
Can you show in either of those posts where I did not follow your dictum?
However, if you will look at my posts after that I think you will find that I did NOT discuss the issue you suggested should go to a different thread.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Adminnemooseus, posted 09-14-2007 10:03 PM Adminnemooseus has not replied

AdminNem
Inactive Member


Message 100 of 199 (422013)
09-15-2007 2:03 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by kuresu
09-13-2007 8:31 PM


Re: brenna's suspension
admin nem mentions, brenna has mentioned previously that she doesn't need/want to be scolded for not using capitalization. What other reaction can one expect from brenna aside from extreme aggravation?
I imagine with enough self-justification we all could rely on "extreme aggravation" as a reason for ad hominem. But as with most things, there simply has to be some boundaries. And after two previous warnings were issued, followed by, "grow up you fucking cripple," pretty much will guarantee some kind of negative reaction.
Could she have expressed her anger better? Sure. Does her post demand a 12 hour suspension? No.
A 12 hour suspension is considered very lenient. People have been suspended for much longer, and for less of an offense. I imagine for my first time ever issuing a suspension that I could have been a lot more stringent.
If anything, also suspend mark for goading. Seeing as how he's responsible for unleashing the ad hominem.
Mark was issued a suspension that mirrored Brenna's.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by kuresu, posted 09-13-2007 8:31 PM kuresu has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by macaroniandcheese, posted 09-15-2007 2:30 PM AdminNem has replied

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 101 of 199 (422020)
09-15-2007 2:30 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by AdminNem
09-15-2007 2:03 PM


Re: brenna's suspension
I imagine with enough self-justification we all could rely on "extreme aggravation" as a reason for ad hominem. But as with most things, there simply has to be some boundaries. And after two previous warnings were issued, followed by, "grow up you fucking cripple," pretty much will guarantee some kind of negative reaction.
i don't think anyone is actually arguing that i shouldn't have been suspended. i think the biggest complaint is that no one did anything about his off-topic and useless remark that has been repeatedly warned against for the last two fucking years.
Mark was issued a suspension that mirrored Brenna's.
3 hours after the fact by a different moderator and grudgingly, from my reading of the related post.
Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.
Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.

i'm not going to capitalize my posts, get better eyes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by AdminNem, posted 09-15-2007 2:03 PM AdminNem has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by iceage, posted 09-15-2007 2:39 PM macaroniandcheese has not replied
 Message 104 by AdminNem, posted 09-15-2007 3:43 PM macaroniandcheese has not replied
 Message 109 by Quetzal, posted 09-15-2007 6:08 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

iceage 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5914 days)
Posts: 1024
From: Pacific Northwest
Joined: 09-08-2003


Message 102 of 199 (422025)
09-15-2007 2:39 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by macaroniandcheese
09-15-2007 2:30 PM


Re: brenna's suspension
crimmeny give it break. We are talking about a few hour suspension. It is childish to expect a facility like this, policed with volunteer monitors that try their best, built and maintained for free, that there will be some sort of fairness and uniform application of the rules in all cases.
BTW... I can only hope this post warrants a multi-day suspension as I really need to get some work done

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by macaroniandcheese, posted 09-15-2007 2:30 PM macaroniandcheese has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by AdminNosy, posted 09-15-2007 3:40 PM iceage has not replied
 Message 105 by AdminNem, posted 09-15-2007 3:48 PM iceage has not replied

AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 103 of 199 (422034)
09-15-2007 3:40 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by iceage
09-15-2007 2:39 PM


Temptation
mmmmmm soo tempting. I little misuse of power is fun now and then.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by iceage, posted 09-15-2007 2:39 PM iceage has not replied

AdminNem
Inactive Member


Message 104 of 199 (422036)
09-15-2007 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by macaroniandcheese
09-15-2007 2:30 PM


Re: brenna's suspension
i think the biggest complaint is that no one did anything about his off-topic and useless remark that has been repeatedly warned against for the last two fucking years.
Fair enough, which is why I spoke out in your defense. I simply didn't think that it was a suspendable offense. If he had retaliated, then he would have been promptly suspended, and for a much longer period of time for directly circumventing the moderator request.
In either case, I hope that brings some solace.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by macaroniandcheese, posted 09-15-2007 2:30 PM macaroniandcheese has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by kuresu, posted 09-15-2007 8:18 PM AdminNem has not replied

AdminNem
Inactive Member


Message 105 of 199 (422038)
09-15-2007 3:48 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by iceage
09-15-2007 2:39 PM


Re: brenna's suspension
crimmeny give it break. We are talking about a few hour suspension. It is childish to expect a facility like this, policed with volunteer monitors that try their best, built and maintained for free, that there will be some sort of fairness and uniform application of the rules in all cases.
Brenna has made it clear that she is not disagreeing with the decision. She is not even asking for special treatment. She is simply questioning the equity of suspending her and not the other member. She is free to do that and is encouraged to express her distaste respectfully, as that is the reason for this thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by iceage, posted 09-15-2007 2:39 PM iceage has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by macaroniandcheese, posted 09-15-2007 3:52 PM AdminNem has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024