|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 13.0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
Taz-style hijinx are no longer possible. He's welcome to keep trying as I'd love to find more problem tags. The words in this post all appear between "xmp" tags, which, if the software is working as it should, are now automatically removed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
If you want a test job, dBoard 3.0 will be entering the test phase somewhere around the end of this year.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
First, about the little suspension icon (
My intention when I added this icon was that it would alleviate the need for announcing suspensions in the bannings and suspensions thread, especially since one can also get a list of all currently suspended members on the members page, but most moderators have continued this practice, and that may still be a good idea, I'm actually not sure. Because of the availability of the suspension icon I've become very spotty about posting announcements about suspensions. Another feature coming with dBoard 3.0 will be maintaining a history of suspensions for each member account. About Jar's suspension, declarations like this that seemed outside the flow of discussion have caused me concern for a long time. This is from Jar's Message 15:
jar writes: The problem is that Biblical Christianity and Biblical Creationism cannot be defended or justified using reason, logic or reality. They can only resort to emotion and invective, that is all they have. To deny them those few remaining methods of defense of their position, you create a situation where they cannot make their best defense of their arguments, or any defense as a matter of fact. The issue for me isn't whether this is true or false, but that it works against our goal of maintaining civil dialogue here. Both creationists and evolutionists should treat the other side as the honest and respected opposition, not as hysterics, or any number of other provocative labels we often see coming from members, such as naive, delusional, liar, etc. Think whatever you like inside, but overt expressions should be civil. I viewed Jar's post as just yet another regrettable expression lying on the border of a Forum Guidelines violation that makes moderators jobs more difficult, but it didn't seem like suspension material. But Jar's challenging and dismissive reply to AdminBuzsaw in Message 23 seemed to me, when combined with his pattern of similar responses and with his not taking to heart any of my several low-level cautions over the past months, sufficient to justify a suspension, if for no other reason to make clear my determination to maintain civility here. Some might remember Scott Page, a published academic who eventually ceased participating here because of frequent suspensions. His explanation for his behavior was that he used to respond to creationists with careful and lengthy explanations containing a great deal of reliable and verified information, but after experience taught him that this did no good he began to frequently resort to insult and invective. I think he had set his goals too high because he didn't see exchanges such as take place here as an ongoing process, but rather as something from which meaningful progress in the form of creationists converted to evolution should emerge, which, of course, almost never happens. In other words, he became too frustrated to participate in a civil manner. The same may to a small extent have happened to Jar, for in my view he too often takes the opportunity to express his conclusions about creationists, which independent of their truth or falsity is usually not the topic of discussion, and even worse, is provocative in a way that distracts from the topic and makes discussion more difficult. Jar is a valued member of EvC Forum of longstanding who has made significant contributions as both member, moderator and technical contributor. I can't stress how much I appreciate his efforts. His suspension will I hope be interpreted by him not as personal and not as any judgement that he is wrong, but as merely reflecting the fact that no two people's visions are going to match precisely, and that this is just one minor issue that we don't happen to see the same way.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
nemesis_juggernaut writes: It doesn't really matter I suppose. Its done. And Moderator decision is final anyhow. If memory serves me correctly, I've been overruled and superseded a few times. I don't rule with quite the iron hand that some people seem to think. My intent is that all moderators have an equal voice. I concede that there are some things I hold as non-negotiable, but it's been rare that they've become an issue.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
You really should check the admin forum more often.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
Tazmanius Devilus writes: If you want a demonstration to see how I did it, I want a guarantee that I won't be banned for it. Gee, what a predicament that would be, a tester who must fear suspension every time he does his job! I don't need a demo, you can just tell me any tags. I have a list of tags that are already disallowed in dBoard 3.0, and if you find any I don't already have I'll just add them to the list. I'll disallow them in the current version, too, if they seem particularly dangerous. Here's the current list:
I suppose there are a few truly destructive things testers could do that wouldn't be good for an active board, like deleting messages or threads, but any non-destructive poking at an active board doesn't seem like a significant danger. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
Uh, this isn't a treasure hunt. What's the tag?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
A significant segment of the membership likes to argue against bans and suspensions, so if in response the moderator team is somewhat lenient regarding certain members then it is incumbent upon the membership to be tolerant of these certain members when they exhibit the behaviors that lead the moderator team to prefer that they be permanently banned. Abuse of someone behaving like an idiot is still abuse. Besides, consider the old saw that when one gets into it with an idiot, bystanders won't be able to tell which is which.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
We've now experienced the extremes from both sides. Further comments are still welcome, but let's keep it constructive, okay? Thanks!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
Apologies for the confusion regarding the suspended and inactive statuses. Here's a brief explanation:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
petrophysics writes: I don't think there should be special treatment. The world is filled with billions of people who believe in God and don't act insane or possessed. Perhaps more of them would show up here if you didn't coddle the nuts. That might also give people a more rational and balanced look at "believers" in general. Why cater to the lunatic fringe? I have many times posed the same question to the creationist moderators. Evolutionists firmly rebut their nuttier elements (e.g., Hoot Mon), but creationists seem to allow their nuttier elements free rein. Why aren't more creationists challenging Ray Martinez and IamJoseph and CTD and Vashgun and so forth saying something like, "Hey, dude, you don't speak for all Christians, and I don't agree with the views you're expressing or the way you're expressing them. You're making Christianity look bad."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
As I recently stated in the admin forum, introducing Biblical or religious ideas in the science threads is fine as long as they're accompanied by scientific evidence. But absent any evidence there's nothing to discuss or rebut except the Bible and religion, which would make it a religious discussion and therefore inappropriate for the science forums.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
Good point. I assume you're talking about the Your reason for accepting evolution thread? Let me see what I can do.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
Hi Buz,
The message from Jar that you reference, Message 16, says this:
Jar writes: So each day was light and dark, even before there was a Sun. No need of a Sun or Moon. Have you ever read the Bible Buz? The message has been edited. Is this the content you're concerned about, or did it used to say something different?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13014 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
Let's all just try to get the thread (mind reading) back on the rails. I'll see what I can do to help.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024