|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,482 Year: 3,739/9,624 Month: 610/974 Week: 223/276 Day: 63/34 Hour: 0/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 14.0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2664 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
With all due respect, nwr, horse piddle.
If "intelligence"/"instinct" has no scientific currency, why, praytell, is it bandied about so?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6409 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Sorry, but this is the wrong place for such discussion.
Let's end the political smears
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trixie Member (Idle past 3728 days) Posts: 1011 From: Edinburgh Joined: |
You said
It has been determined in past discussion that member admins have a natural tendency to favor their own ideological kind. Get it? I'm intrigued as to where I can find this discussion. AFAICR, creationist moderators were recruited so that the usual creationist claim of biased moderation by evo mods (and it was hoped that the creationist moderators would moderate creationists) would be seen to be groundless. The last creationist mod who used his mod status to defend fellow creationists on ideological grounds alone was randman and I know of no other mod that was "sacked" for behaving in this way because none of them do. So, will you please provide a link so that I can go and read the discussion you referred to since I cerainly didn't see it first time round.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminBuzsaw Inactive Member |
Hi Trixie. I don't know where to find it and don't have the time to do all the reading necessary to search it out. It's in the archives somewhere.
AdminPD, in the OP of this thread, has made it clear that this thread is not a discussion thread so other than what I've said I won't be engaging in any debate or further discussion on this.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
obvious Child Member (Idle past 4138 days) Posts: 661 Joined: |
You'd get frustrated at someone who deliberately separated specifically noted combined issues, ignored huge amounts of points, ignored your refutations and called you delusional too.
But this entire thread seems nothing more then whiner channel. So someone called you this or that, are we to sanitize everything? Edited by obvious Child, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminBuzsaw Inactive Member |
There has been some discussion of this dispute in PAF. So far there doesn't appear to be a difinitive consensus in PAF as to whether BS is a permissible term other than better communication would be prefered. One admin's position was that the warning was warranted while another's position was that it would not warrant a suspension but better wordage preferred.
I am moderating my position in that I will not be considering BS wordage as a guideline violation unless it is used in an obvious uncivil manner. This will be my position unless difinitive position by Admin or a consensus of admins is established. I will not be singling you out to monitor. That was a mistake on my part and over the line. I apologize for that. I will however as do other moderators be watchful for violations of guidelines across the board.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
macaroniandcheese  Suspended Member (Idle past 3950 days) Posts: 4258 Joined: |
I will not be singling you out to monitor. That was a mistake on my part and over the line. I apologize for that. thank you for that.
unless it is used in an obvious uncivil manner. who decides what is "obvious". considering the uses of "obvious" on this board, i'm unconvinced of the reality of the term.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1366 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
But this entire thread seems nothing more then whiner channel. So someone called you this or that, are we to sanitize everything? no, and that is not the purpose. this thread (the whining channel) is precisely what ensures that. you will find many complaints that when aired get shot down pretty quickly. you will also find that evos often defend creationists here, from inappropriate moderator action.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trixie Member (Idle past 3728 days) Posts: 1011 From: Edinburgh Joined: |
Priceless, absolutely priceless! You couldn't make this up! Here we have a thread entitled "General Discussion of Moderation Procedures 14.0" and you state
AdminPD, in the OP of this thread, has made it clear that this thread is not a discussion thread so other than what I've said I won't be engaging in any debate or further discussion on this. If you read her OP a little more carefully you'll see that what she in fact says is
This thread is provided for the general membership to present and discuss comments or concerns dealing with moderator procedures/actions or the need for moderator action.
(bolding and italicisation mine) Are you seriously suggesting that this thread isn't a discussion thread? It's fine that you don't want to engage in debate on this thread, but that's not what I was doing. I was trying to discuss moderation and was interested in reading the discussion you mentioned so that I could be more informed as to what was said. You obviously remember the discussion so should be able to find it. I have absolutely no recollection of it so have no idea where to begin searching. Can you give me a hint?Thanks
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminPD Inactive Administrator |
quote:The admins. Each admin is going to call it as they see it. That's why we have this thread to allow feedback and appeals. As you see by AdminBuz's post, we also ask for input from other admins. We are a very diverse group, but we do our best to uphold the rules as evenhandedly as humanly possible. If you are satisfied with the results of this discussion, I ask that we consider it concluded and no more discussion is needed concerning your specific issue.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
macaroniandcheese  Suspended Member (Idle past 3950 days) Posts: 4258 Joined: |
i would think that it might be neccessary to permit posting in this thread during a suspension. it should be neccessary to endure a wrongful suspension before being able to complain about it. you know, since there's nothing to be given in recompense.
and since certain admins have more obvious interpretations that others for obvious. Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given. Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNWR Inactive Member |
i would think that it might be neccessary to permit posting in this thread during a suspension.
A suspended member can send an email to an admin, asking that it be posted on their behalf. Several of the admins make their email address accessible. Of course, the admin would use his/her judgement on whether to post the email content. But if it is a reasoned argument and not an inflammatory reaction, it would likely be posted. Note: I am not opposed to your idea of allowing suspended members to post in this thread, but that would probably require changes to the site software, so might not be easy to implement. To comment on moderation procedures or respond to admin messages:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
anglagard Member (Idle past 859 days) Posts: 2339 From: Socorro, New Mexico USA Joined: |
I disagree with Adminnemooseus concerning the closing of the thread Message 24. Not so much because the thread was closed but rather the reasons behind such actions.
Adminnemooseus writes:
I also suggest that Jar, in general, be much more selective in his starting of new topics. I've had thoughts that his new topics permissions should be suspended. I believe such an attack upon the person, who however mischievously promotes, sustained irony is completely unwarranted. Jar is only acting in the great tradition of Cervantes and Jonathan Swift in using such literary methods. Did not Cervantes humiliate the false and corrupt concept of chivalry in Don Quixote? Did not Swift humiliate the abuse of the Irish in a Modest Proposal? Then why should jar be subject to such prudish restrictions concerning the use of sustained irony in exposing political stupidity and idiotic conspiracy theories in this forum? Do you have no respect for this historic and highly reputable method of expressing dissent? I think it is a sad day for this forum when such a time honored expression of talent is subject to censorship. Edited by anglagard, : caps Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2664 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
I think it is a sad day for this forum when such a time honored expression of talent is subject to censorship. I agree, Angla. I see no reason that thread should have been closed. And I certainly see no reason to admonish Jar like that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3665 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
I think it is a sad day for this forum when such a time honored expression of talent is subject to censorship. I agree, Angla. I see no reason that thread should have been closed. And I certainly see no reason to admonish Jar like that. Have to agree with all this - I thought it was an excellent post, that gave me a good hour's worth of thoughtful musings, not to mention the delightful first minute of - OMG, really, no way, wow, etc, etc. Yours, gullible Limey
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024