Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 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:   Report Discussion Problems Here 4.0
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 211 of 860 (725489)
04-27-2014 6:02 PM
Reply to: Message 210 by Ed67
04-27-2014 5:51 PM


Re: mini-rant
Why are "Theological Creationism" and "Intelligent Design" bunched together on the same thread title?
Actually, that was about a forum where these kinds of topics could be discussed without the evidence requirements of the science forums.

Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 210 by Ed67, posted 04-27-2014 5:51 PM Ed67 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 212 by Ed67, posted 04-27-2014 6:14 PM nwr has replied

  
Ed67
Member (Idle past 3329 days)
Posts: 159
Joined: 04-14-2014


Message 212 of 860 (725490)
04-27-2014 6:14 PM
Reply to: Message 211 by nwr
04-27-2014 6:02 PM


Re: mini-rant
Ok, I see, like Theological Creationists can discuss evidence from Intelligent Design theory that supports their beliefs. I get it.
However, to say:
nwr writes:
...these kinds of topics could be discussed without the evidence requirements of the science forums.
is the same question-begging as I thought the title was, and just as biased toward the Darwinian camp.
It implies that NEITHER 'Theological Creationism' NOR 'Intelligent Design' are supported by scientific fact, and that's just not true of ID. (nor for that matter properly understood Theological Creationism, but that's another topic)
cheers
Edited by Ed67, : No reason given.
Edited by Ed67, : No reason given.
Edited by Ed67, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by nwr, posted 04-27-2014 6:02 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by nwr, posted 04-27-2014 6:46 PM Ed67 has replied
 Message 218 by Adminnemooseus, posted 04-27-2014 8:45 PM Ed67 has not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 213 of 860 (725492)
04-27-2014 6:46 PM
Reply to: Message 212 by Ed67
04-27-2014 6:14 PM


Re: mini-rant
However, to say:
nwr writes:
...these kinds of topics could be discussed without the evidence requirements of the science forums.
is the same question-begging as I thought the title was, and just as biased toward the Darwinian camp.
This is just nonsense. It has to do with the forum rules, not with question begging.
There has long been tension that the evidence requirements for the science forums are hard for creationists and ID proponents to meet. So the particular forum was created within the "Social and Religious Issues" group, where different standards are used.
You can still propose a topic in one of the science forums. It's just that there is also an alternate forum you can use with different evidence requirements.
It implies that NEITHER 'Theological Creationism' NOR 'Intelligent Design' are supported by scientific fact, and that's just not true of ID.
Nonsense. You can still propose topics in Intelligent Design, which is one of the science forums.

Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by Ed67, posted 04-27-2014 6:14 PM Ed67 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 214 by Ed67, posted 04-27-2014 7:43 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
Ed67
Member (Idle past 3329 days)
Posts: 159
Joined: 04-14-2014


(1)
Message 214 of 860 (725497)
04-27-2014 7:43 PM
Reply to: Message 213 by nwr
04-27-2014 6:46 PM


Re: mini-rant
Ok I completely understand you this time. That forum is for discussing non-scientific implications of ID theory. I apologize for speaking out in my ignorance, I can only say that my protest was made in good faith, although misguided by my assumptions.
Lesson learned (again lol)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 213 by nwr, posted 04-27-2014 6:46 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
Ed67
Member (Idle past 3329 days)
Posts: 159
Joined: 04-14-2014


Message 215 of 860 (725498)
04-27-2014 7:54 PM


We have a Problem
The personal abuse on the Intelligent Design threads is getting out of hand. If it doesn't stop, I will have to recommend disciplinary actions, or leave this board. There has been no meaningful discussion for the last couple days, and lots of personal harassment and insults. I'm talking about these threads :
'Is there a legitimate argument for design?' and
'The Semiotic argument for design'
For instance, the latest thread in 'Legitimate argument' is this:
Capt Stormfield writes:
You are throwing useless RED HERRINGS into the discussion in an attempt to harass me. Any more of this an I will be reporting this to the administrators.
Hey, I've got an idea, why don't you report that I've invited you to kiss my ass, you unresponsive troll.
Now, if that is the opinion of all of you Darwinists on this forum, just let me know and I'll take my leave.
There's no understanding to be found under these conditions.

Replies to this message:
 Message 216 by Capt Stormfield, posted 04-27-2014 8:14 PM Ed67 has not replied
 Message 217 by AdminNosy, posted 04-27-2014 8:17 PM Ed67 has replied
 Message 219 by AZPaul3, posted 04-27-2014 8:51 PM Ed67 has not replied
 Message 223 by RAZD, posted 04-28-2014 7:10 AM Ed67 has not replied

  
Capt Stormfield
Member (Idle past 456 days)
Posts: 428
From: Vancouver Island
Joined: 01-17-2009


Message 216 of 860 (725500)
04-27-2014 8:14 PM
Reply to: Message 215 by Ed67
04-27-2014 7:54 PM


Re: We have a Problem
Whiny troll whines some more. Try responding to questions. Or leave. Please.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Note: This message resulted in a suspension. - Adminnemooseus

This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by Ed67, posted 04-27-2014 7:54 PM Ed67 has not replied

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


(2)
Message 217 of 860 (725502)
04-27-2014 8:17 PM
Reply to: Message 215 by Ed67
04-27-2014 7:54 PM


Problems
Without having carefully reviewed every single sentence of the back and forth with you I can say that you should give up and leave. You ignore responses, do not answer issues raised with your assertions and are more insulting than most here.
Since you don't seem to want to actually carry on an honest debate you can either stop whining and take what you engender or get all sulky and leave.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by Ed67, posted 04-27-2014 7:54 PM Ed67 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by Ed67, posted 04-27-2014 8:51 PM AdminNosy has not replied

  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 218 of 860 (725506)
04-27-2014 8:45 PM
Reply to: Message 212 by Ed67
04-27-2014 6:14 PM


The evolution of this forum
is the same question-begging as I thought the title was, and just as biased toward the Darwinian camp.
In the beginning, evcforum.net was set up as a site for science discussion. If a creationist believed that science supported his/her creationist beliefs, then this was the place to discuss it. The "Science Forums" forums.
Things have since diversified from that beginning, resulting in general discussions ("Coffee House") and more purely theological discussions (the various "Social and Religious Issues" forums. Of course, things that belong in one area tend to also slop over into another area.
Adminnemooseus

Or something like that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by Ed67, posted 04-27-2014 6:14 PM Ed67 has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 219 of 860 (725509)
04-27-2014 8:51 PM
Reply to: Message 215 by Ed67
04-27-2014 7:54 PM


Re: We have a Problem
Ed,
There are a number of religious folks and creationists here that get on just, well, Ok to fine I suppose is the operative range.
There is even one lady here, the love of my life, my dearest headache and maddeningly defiant YEC, who not just withstands the withering assault upon her (absolutely zany and off-the-wall inane) ideas, she argues right back, giving no quarter, taking no prisoners and actually being semi-reasonable about it some of the time. And her ideas make yours look (almost) sane. Does she have a bigger set of balls than you?
Stop whining and get on with the show.
There's no understanding to be found under these conditions.
There is no understanding to be had, period. We have all been here before. You present nothing new. You are not going to convince anyone and, despite our best efforts, you are not here to learn.
"We" do not have a problem. You may, but that is up to you, not us.
Stop bitching like a heart-broke little girl, continue the fight, maybe a bit calmer (that's for me, not you) or take your IDiotic ball and find someplace else to shill.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by Ed67, posted 04-27-2014 7:54 PM Ed67 has not replied

  
Ed67
Member (Idle past 3329 days)
Posts: 159
Joined: 04-14-2014


Message 220 of 860 (725510)
04-27-2014 8:51 PM
Reply to: Message 217 by AdminNosy
04-27-2014 8:17 PM


Re: Problems
Well, as an administrator, it's your responsibility to enforce the rules that are intended to keep this forum civil.
If it's your choice not to take corrective action, then I'll have to declare this forum a sham. I was promised "understanding through Discussion" not harassment by dog piling.
You all know what you are doing. You can't refute my argument for design so you act dumb and start asking pre-high school level questions, nit picking and finally personal attacks. A little in the spirit of humour is entertainment. In these quantities, however, it's harassment and abuse.
So you've ceased to entertain me.
Edited by Ed67, : No reason given.
Edited by Ed67, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by AdminNosy, posted 04-27-2014 8:17 PM AdminNosy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 221 by Omnivorous, posted 04-28-2014 12:17 AM Ed67 has not replied
 Message 224 by Admin, posted 04-28-2014 8:59 AM Ed67 has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3978
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 221 of 860 (725520)
04-28-2014 12:17 AM
Reply to: Message 220 by Ed67
04-27-2014 8:51 PM


Re: Problems
Ed writes:
So you've ceased to entertain me.
Is this where you declare victory and leave? I predicted that; it's scientific!
Do you know how many times we've seen this? You arrive, butter wouldn't melt in your mouth; from there it's nothing but repetitive bare assertions and high school taunts; then, when you've provoked someone into immoderate indignation, you declare yourself the winner by a technical knockout due to civil superiority.
Nice job. Who cares? Go away.
Prissy little pissant.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 220 by Ed67, posted 04-27-2014 8:51 PM Ed67 has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 222 of 860 (725526)
04-28-2014 2:03 AM


More evidence that Ed is a troll

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 223 of 860 (725533)
04-28-2014 7:10 AM
Reply to: Message 215 by Ed67
04-27-2014 7:54 PM


Re: We have a Problem (imperial we)
The personal abuse on the Intelligent Design threads is getting out of hand. If it doesn't stop, I will have to recommend disciplinary actions, or leave this board. There has been no meaningful discussion for the last couple days, and lots of personal harassment and insults. I'm talking about these threads :
'Is there a legitimate argument for design?'
Example: Message 262 ... there are more, gander.
oh the irony

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by Ed67, posted 04-27-2014 7:54 PM Ed67 has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 224 of 860 (725538)
04-28-2014 8:59 AM
Reply to: Message 220 by Ed67
04-27-2014 8:51 PM


Re: Problems
Hi Ed,
As I said in my reply to your email, you appear to be giving as good as you get. Since none of the other moderators saw that reply I'll note that I suggested that you attempt to nudge discussion onto a more productive path over the next couple days, and if that doesn't work to then post a note to Report Discussion Problems Here 4.0. But instead of a couple days you waited a couple of hours.
One other comment. A quick review of the Semiotic argument for ID thread reveals that most of your posts are very short, so one suggestion I can make is that discussion boards work best when a position is explained in some detail a number of times, and then defended a number of times. That's the only way its various aspects become understood. Your participation in that thread became very brief very quickly. I didn't see the more lengthy and repeated explanations that are usually associated with success. By lengthy I don't necessarily mean long, but certainly much longer than one to three sentences.
One other suggestion I can make is that if you want to keep discussion civil that you avoid posts like this in Message 84:
Ed67 writes:
Taq writes:
No, I am explaining what it would look like if it did happen. That is not faith.
Oh, boy, you got caught with your hand in the cookie jar and chose to deny it.
Get real. You and the gang have a BELIEF that abiogenesis occurred. You demonstrated that by your post.
A little honesty would go a long way here...but it's good entertainment value for a rainy day off, watching you squirm
Independent of whether you're right or wrong about Taq's claim, responses like this are usually the harbingers of a breakdown in civility. I'm not saying you were the first or that you're to blame, but you *did* contribute to where the thread is now.
Moderators are not here to untie the Gordian knot of who is to blame when a discussion goes bad. Rather, we're here to make discussion as productive as possible by enforcing the Forum Guidelines. But we're not magicians or clairvoyant, and moderating discussion boards can be like herding cats. Good moderation can help some discussions and not others, and the outcome usually depends more upon the participants than anything moderators can do.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 220 by Ed67, posted 04-27-2014 8:51 PM Ed67 has not replied

  
Dogmafood
Member (Idle past 348 days)
Posts: 1815
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


(5)
Message 225 of 860 (725539)
04-28-2014 9:04 AM


Capt Stormfield's suspension is ludicrous.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024