Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures (aka 'The Whine List')
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 451 of 1049 (663088)
05-21-2012 10:39 AM
Reply to: Message 445 by Dr Adequate
05-21-2012 7:56 AM


Re: Don't be naive
He could man up and discuss something substantive.
Like the application of Occam's Razor?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 445 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-21-2012 7:56 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 454 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-21-2012 10:59 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.0


(11)
Message 452 of 1049 (663089)
05-21-2012 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 450 by Bolder-dash
05-21-2012 9:48 AM


Just Ask Granny
Hi folks and welcome to this week's edition of Just Ask Granny. Our first correspondent this week is Bolder-dash form China. Hi Bolders, nice name! You must have chosen it during a rare moment of clarity. Let's take a look at your question;
I thought if people took offense to abusive posters, it is because they are just too thin skinned, just ask Granny.
Why sure Balders, I'd be glad to throw in! I think you're quite right, creationists do seem to be a touchy bunch. The phrase "thin skinned" would certainly be a fair description of a good many of them. After all, for over a year you yourself have been whining like a child who's lost his candy. It scarcely makes the creationist contingent look resilient!
Really though, I don't think that this is the biggest reason for creationist flounce-outs. I think that after a while, the strain of constantly being wrong about everything gets to the poor dears. After all, no-one likes being wrong, not even creationists, who've had so much practise at it. It must be wearing to argue a point so blisteringly stupid in a subject where you're so woefully out of your depth. I don't envy you your task.
Of course, you could always have a go at not being wrong, but you probably wouldn't like it. It's not for everyone.
Well, I hope that answered your query and do be sure to tune in next week, when we'll be asking; just what is the best way to suck eggs? Until then,
Mutate and Survive
Edited by Granny Magda, : No reason given.
Edited by Granny Magda, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 450 by Bolder-dash, posted 05-21-2012 9:48 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 453 of 1049 (663090)
05-21-2012 10:59 AM
Reply to: Message 448 by Bolder-dash
05-21-2012 9:09 AM


Re: Don't be naive
Sure A anytime, just tell me which debate website you would like to debate on.
I like to debate on this one, as you must be aware.
If you are man enough that is.
It was no great strain on my virile fortitude to tell you what you already know.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 448 by Bolder-dash, posted 05-21-2012 9:09 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 454 of 1049 (663091)
05-21-2012 10:59 AM
Reply to: Message 451 by crashfrog
05-21-2012 10:39 AM


Re: Don't be naive
Like the application of Occam's Razor?
That would be more methodological than substantive.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 451 by crashfrog, posted 05-21-2012 10:39 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(4)
Message 455 of 1049 (663092)
05-21-2012 11:09 AM
Reply to: Message 450 by Bolder-dash
05-21-2012 9:48 AM


Re: short leash
thought people didn't get banned for here for being abusive.
Well you thought wrong. Why in the world would abuse that is not even on topic be tolerated? You don't contribute anymore. Abuse is your entire reason for being here.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison

This message is a reply to:
 Message 450 by Bolder-dash, posted 05-21-2012 9:48 AM Bolder-dash has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 456 by Bolder-dash, posted 05-21-2012 10:30 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied
 Message 457 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-22-2012 12:22 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Bolder-dash
Member (Idle past 3629 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009


Message 456 of 1049 (663163)
05-21-2012 10:30 PM
Reply to: Message 455 by NoNukes
05-21-2012 11:09 AM


for example
Why sure Balders, I'd be glad to throw in! I think you're quite right, creationists do seem to be a touchy bunch. The phrase "thin skinned" would certainly be a fair description of a good many of them. After all, for over a year you yourself have been whining like a child who's lost his candy. It scarcely makes the creationist contingent look resilient!
Really though, I don't think that this is the biggest reason for creationist flounce-outs. I think that after a while, the strain of constantly being wrong about everything gets to the poor dears. After all, no-one likes being wrong, not even creationists, who've had so much practise at it. It must be wearing to argue a point so blisteringly stupid in a subject where you're so woefully out of your depth. I don't envy you your task.
Is that what you mean by off topic abuse that would get one banned for a month here at EvC? Or at least certainly get one on a short leash right?
Because I think the point you want to emphasize is about the fairness of the website, right? One might feel the rules are very restrictive, but at least they are applied fairly, isn't that right nonukes?
Perhaps there is some valuable lessons one can learn from this brilliant prose by Granny. Maybe on EvC its best not to use the word i d i o t , but instead opt for the more sensitive "blisteringly stupid." And instead of saying someone is not schooled in their science, one should go with "woefully out of your depth." That is certainly topical, although topical to what is another story.
And "flounce outs" and "poor dears" are indeed very endearing phrases, as is turning the posters name into a cute rhyming homophone for effect, you know like calling a poster Grainy Smegma, for example.
Now I see why I am on the "short leash" I have been going around questioning the science of evolution and the fairness of how one is able to present their debates on this board, when I should have just been thinking of better pet names, and some synonyms for the word i d i o t.
Thank you for pointing out the fairness of this website to me nonukes. I was so wrong, everyone is indeed treated the same here.
* = s t u p i d
Edited by Bolder-dash, : Opps!, once again I failed to be aware that Granny is allowed to use the word s t u p i d in her posts, whereby there is some software issue (and I am sure its just a glitch) where I can't. I guess I have to work harder on my synonyms. But again nonukes, I get your point about the fairness of this site.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 455 by NoNukes, posted 05-21-2012 11:09 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 457 of 1049 (663175)
05-22-2012 12:22 AM
Reply to: Message 455 by NoNukes
05-21-2012 11:09 AM


Re: short leash
Well you thought wrong. Why in the world would abuse that is not even on topic be tolerated? You don't contribute anymore. Abuse is your entire reason for being here.
Oh, he does other things too, be fair. There's the posturing, the self-pitying whining, the dishonesty, and the hilarious excuses for not engaging in actual debate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 455 by NoNukes, posted 05-21-2012 11:09 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 458 by Bolder-dash, posted 05-22-2012 12:44 AM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Bolder-dash
Member (Idle past 3629 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009


(1)
Message 458 of 1049 (663177)
05-22-2012 12:44 AM
Reply to: Message 457 by Dr Adequate
05-22-2012 12:22 AM


when can we debate A?
So, I am very glad that you are now open to the idea of finally discussing the true validity of evolutionary science. Let's be honest, we can't do that here if you keep hiding behind Percy's protective skirt.
How about at Creation VS Evolution Debate Forum - A forum to talk about the creation/evolution debate?
I realize that requires you leaving your protective blanket at home, but hey no problem, you at least have science on your side right?
When will you be there?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 457 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-22-2012 12:22 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 459 by PaulK, posted 05-22-2012 1:47 AM Bolder-dash has not replied
 Message 460 by ReverendDG, posted 05-22-2012 2:07 AM Bolder-dash has not replied
 Message 461 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-22-2012 3:06 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 459 of 1049 (663178)
05-22-2012 1:47 AM
Reply to: Message 458 by Bolder-dash
05-22-2012 12:44 AM


Re: when can we debate A?
I note that your preferred site seems to be all but dead. Apparently it isn't any more attractive to creationists than this one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 458 by Bolder-dash, posted 05-22-2012 12:44 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
ReverendDG
Member (Idle past 4110 days)
Posts: 1119
From: Topeka,kansas
Joined: 06-06-2005


(2)
Message 460 of 1049 (663182)
05-22-2012 2:07 AM
Reply to: Message 458 by Bolder-dash
05-22-2012 12:44 AM


Re: when can we debate A?
So, I am very glad that you are now open to the idea of finally discussing the true validity of evolutionary science. Let's be honest, we can't do that here if you keep hiding behind Percy's protective skirt.
How about at Creation VS Evolution Debate Forum - A forum to talk about the creation/evolution debate?
I realize that requires you leaving your protective blanket at home, but hey no problem, you at least have science on your side right?
When will you be there?
hey if you feel you need a neutral ground i'll debate you on carm.org on the EvsID board, since it has a few cheerleaders on it to make you all warm and fuzzy about posting the same nonsense every other creationist does.
same name on there too.
oh yeah hi EvC, been a long time, sad to see this board stagnate from lack of creationists, must be all that lack of that thing called evidence you guys demand

This message is a reply to:
 Message 458 by Bolder-dash, posted 05-22-2012 12:44 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(3)
Message 461 of 1049 (663183)
05-22-2012 3:06 AM
Reply to: Message 458 by Bolder-dash
05-22-2012 12:44 AM


Re: when can we debate A?
Let's be honest ...
A phrase which should ideally not appear in the midst of a drivel of stupid lies.
If you wish to debate, try doing it here, on a forum where people actually post, and see if anyone stops you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 458 by Bolder-dash, posted 05-22-2012 12:44 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Shield
Member (Idle past 2861 days)
Posts: 482
Joined: 01-29-2008


(3)
Message 462 of 1049 (663281)
05-22-2012 9:16 PM


Romney the Bully / AE
My reply to Percy/Admin was removed from the romney thread, so i'll post it here.
Admin wrote:
Except for those with an established history we don't suspend without warning, and we don't suspend because someone is unpopular. But becoming personal is clearly against the Forum Guidelines, and posting messages that don't touch even lightly on the topic is clearly against the Forum Guidelines. We're not nit-pickers here, you have to be pretty persistent, but without mentioning any names I do see some evidence of considerable persistence at being personal and off-topic when the whole body of work at EvC Forum is considered.
So consider this an alert to the possibility that there is at least one participant in this thread who is on the threshold of suspension if there are any more personal or off-topic messages.
Then i wrote:
Why not just mention AE by name?
When did AE ever contribute to discussions on EvC? Is it not true that a huge amount of his posts are nothing but personal attacks? Why is he still here? You have the damn ban hammer.
This is one of the most well moderated forums i have come across, i dont get why you still allow obvious trolls like AE here. He even said it himself, he is not here because he is interested in creationism or evolution, he just enjoys trolling the forum.
See the thread for context.
EvC Forum: Romney the Bully
{Admin's message in question. See upthread from there - Adminnemooseus}
Edited by rbp, : No reason given.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Add message specific link etc.

Replies to this message:
 Message 463 by fearandloathing, posted 05-22-2012 9:22 PM Shield has not replied

  
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4144 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


(2)
Message 463 of 1049 (663282)
05-22-2012 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 462 by Shield
05-22-2012 9:16 PM


Re: Romney the Bully / AE
My reply was...
Pathetic that you allow trolls to live here.
Thanks moose.

A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.
― Edward R. Murrow
"Yeah, I know. I'm guilty. I understand that. I knew it was a crime, and I did it anyways. Shit, why argue? I'm a fucking criminal, look at me." - Raoul Duke

This message is a reply to:
 Message 462 by Shield, posted 05-22-2012 9:16 PM Shield has not replied

  
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4144 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


(5)
Message 464 of 1049 (663283)
05-22-2012 9:49 PM


Except for those with an established history we don't suspend without warning
from Message 232
How many times has AE have to be warned and/or suspended before he gets the boot????
This is not the first time he has proven himself to be nothing more than a Troll, he even admits to it. If I tell you I am a troll, then what should you do for the benefit of all the non-trolls who want to participate?? I guess what you are telling us is "Deal with it". Trolls are allowed.
Edited by fearandloathing, : No reason given.

A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.
― Edward R. Murrow
"Yeah, I know. I'm guilty. I understand that. I knew it was a crime, and I did it anyways. Shit, why argue? I'm a fucking criminal, look at me." - Raoul Duke

Replies to this message:
 Message 465 by anglagard, posted 05-23-2012 12:24 AM fearandloathing has seen this message but not replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


(5)
Message 465 of 1049 (663288)
05-23-2012 12:24 AM
Reply to: Message 464 by fearandloathing
05-22-2012 9:49 PM


I must agree with fearandloathing, AE is a self-admitted troll, his proper environment is 4chan /b/, reddit or perhaps even stormfront.
I am here to learn and on the rare occasion teach, not be pestered by obvious hecklers, I feel he serves no purpose on this forum.
Of course this is simply my opinion for what it is worth. Such a decision to ban lies with those who have invested the most time and treasure.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 464 by fearandloathing, posted 05-22-2012 9:49 PM fearandloathing has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 466 by Dogmafood, posted 05-23-2012 9:36 AM anglagard has not replied
 Message 469 by Artemis Entreri, posted 05-23-2012 1:43 PM anglagard has not replied
 Message 556 by anglagard, posted 05-30-2012 10:33 PM anglagard has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024