Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8950 total)
31 online now:
Diomedes, marc9000, Theodoric, Thugpreacha (AdminPhat) (4 members, 27 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 867,191 Year: 22,227/19,786 Month: 790/1,834 Week: 290/500 Day: 53/65 Hour: 0/1

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Stop banning creo members!
Member (Idle past 1633 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006

Message 1 of 7 (496552)
01-29-2009 1:27 AM

I'm referring to randman. For the love of god, unban him, please. And please stop banning creos.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Nighttrain, posted 01-29-2009 1:39 AM Taz has not yet responded
 Message 3 by Parasomnium, posted 01-29-2009 3:23 AM Taz has not yet responded
 Message 4 by Agobot, posted 01-29-2009 8:42 AM Taz has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 2335 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004

Message 2 of 7 (496553)
01-29-2009 1:39 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Taz
01-29-2009 1:27 AM

I was about to post this when Admin shut the gate:

'Hi, Randy, that was the most civil post I`ve ever seen you use. Progress at last. Congratulations'.

OTOH, who knows how long it would have lasted.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Taz, posted 01-29-2009 1:27 AM Taz has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 1038 days)
Posts: 2191
Joined: 07-15-2003

Message 3 of 7 (496557)
01-29-2009 3:23 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Taz
01-29-2009 1:27 AM

I concur
I think banning - which is what the euphemistically termed "permanent suspension" comes down to - should be reserved for people like Baldrick Cunningplan. We want debate, not abuse. But how bad is Randman really?

In the message that got him banned he even stated his intention of bowing out of that particular discussion, because he didn't want to risk being banned. He also said he wasn't trying to be malicious. I believe he meant it.

There may have been many moments when Randman was perilously close to the edge, but I think this wasn't one of them, and I would ask the admins to reconsider.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Taz, posted 01-29-2009 1:27 AM Taz has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 3872 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007

Message 4 of 7 (496602)
01-29-2009 8:42 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Taz
01-29-2009 1:27 AM

Taz writes:

And please stop banning creos.

Convert and you'll be safe. :)

No seriously, science doesn't have a body of truths, it's the domain of religions. Nobody should be pretending to have the final answers, on both sides. Maybe we'll live to see an atheist being permanently suspended, AFAIK these issues are not on the table for discussion here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Taz, posted 01-29-2009 1:27 AM Taz has not yet responded

Inactive Member

Message 5 of 7 (496606)
01-29-2009 9:21 AM

Conforming To Standards
From the creo perspective, IMHO creos are held to a higher standard of debating with evos than vise versa, particularly in science related topics which Rand liked to frequent. It's tough for ID creos to debate anything science related without applying some aspects of ID which do not conform to conventional science.

The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

Administrator (Idle past 446 days)
Posts: 897
Joined: 03-02-2006

Message 6 of 7 (496607)
01-29-2009 9:46 AM

Thank you for the input
Closing this down. I haven't heard any policy changes since this one:
Message 30

So refer to that for the reasons why. If I am mistaken, I'm sure Percy can correct me. Thank you again.

Posts: 12653
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 3.0

Message 7 of 7 (496620)
01-29-2009 11:25 AM

Some Hopefully Helpful Information
Mod is correct, we no longer discuss moderator actions, but we don't want members to be confused, either, so here's a brief explanation about recent actions and a little clarification about our moderation policies.

Over the past month or so I have permanently suspended Ray, Johnfolton (whatever), Syamsu and now Randman. That's a lot of permanent suspensions in a short time. Ray, Johnfolton and Symamsu were given to inarticulate and irrational outbursts and have long been a problem for moderators, and when I finally had some time over the holidays I began paying closer attention to their contributions.

Randman is very articulate and a very strong debater, but he also employs every debate tactic and logical fallacy in the book and is completely unmoderatable. He usually does exactly what he pleases, and only modifies his behavior when incredibly closely moderated. He's taken himself to the edge of permanent suspension several times, always taking a leave of absence for several months just in the nick of time. On his last visit I warned him that if he disappeared again that upon his return he would still be right on the edge of permanent suspension, and that's why the quick action.

We all want Randman here because jousting with him is extremely stimulating. But he's anathema to EvC's primary goal of making possible rational debate that actually gets somewhere. Despite being here a long time, he never seemed to understand that the problems were not with his positions on creation/evolution, but with his behavior regarding the Forum Guidelines. He rarely stays on topic, and he often issues accusations of dishonesty and lies. I have no idea what he was actually hoping to accomplish here, but all you had to do was find a thread in chaos and there would be Randman in the middle of it all in full obfuscation and attack mode.

Over the years I have spent hours and hours explaining our policies to Randman, obviously to no effect, so now he's gone and he has only himself to blame. I know this is a disappointment to everyone, including myself, but that's the way it is.

EvC Forum Director

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019