|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Report Discussion Problems Here 4.0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Faith writes:
You can. Just close the tab on your browser.
I wish I could make EvC disappear.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13042 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Because discussion is being severely impacted in several threads, beginning now I will be handing out suspensions for Forum Guidelines violations.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2135 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
...a ghost town without our creationists!
Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1 "Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
...a ghost town without our creationists! The echo chamber... "Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Message 126
It seems to me that providing a link to an organisation's website is a quite appropriate way of providing the details of their views, especially when it is supplied purely for information. It is also strange coming from someone who has, on a number of occasions provided links to google searches, instead of actual articles, leaving others to guess which (if any) of the results they see are the intended support.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I guess I should have explained that most pages other than EvC are very hard on my eyes so I need to avoid most links and can usually only read part of them when I have to. Same with reading books with slick white pages. I can only read so much before I have to stop. And I wear special blue-blocking lenses at the computer and while reading too. But I did also think the basic idea here is to give opinions in your own words, which I try to do even when I give links. And the point about a whole Google page is to show the range of opinion on a subject, or to show that it's not just a negligible point of my own.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2135 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
The Science in Creationism thread has outlived its usefulness.
Time to euthanize it. [I remember the days when threads were closed after 300 posts--the Science in Creationism thread is a vivid testament to the wisdom of that custom.]Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1 "Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Closing it simply let's Dawn declare censorship and beat his (or her) chest. Best to leave it open so everyone can see just how vacuous Creationism really is.
Edited by jar, : extra and crept in, snicker-snaked it with my vorpal blade near the Tum-Tum Tree.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13042 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Coyote writes: The Science in Creationism thread has outlived its usefulness. Time to euthanize it. The The Science in Creationism thread is in the Free For All forum and is unmoderated. I haven't been monitoring it.
[I remember the days when threads were closed after 300 posts--the Science in Creationism thread is a vivid testament to the wisdom of that custom.] I think returning to a limit on thread length is a good idea for some discussion threads, but I'm not sure 300 is the right number. The old 300 post limit was an artificial limit imposed by technical constraints that no longer exist. If we did return to post limits as the standard instead of the exception, what do people think it should be?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
If we did return to post limits as the standard instead of the exception, what do people think it should be? 200. First, when the limit was 300 new spinoff topics had not only presented themselves, but were midway through development as arguments when the thread was closed. 200 allows 20 people 10 posts or 10 people 20 posts to present their case with regards to the OP. That should be sufficient. Slogging through an old 300 poster is a bit of a struggle and it would be nice if the debates were a little more contained.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined:
|
I would like to see far more one on one threads where input is limited; a return of the old great debate format with a twist. I suggest that when a topic is proposed part of the approval process involves selection of participants. It could be one on one or team on team but make it limited and decided at the initial approval process. In the case of team on team the number should probably be limited to no more than four and all participants named. A peanut gallery would be allowed and open to comment but the main thread strictly controlled as to who can post.
Let's not have just open threads at least in the major non-social chatty sections. AbE: One other thing. For continuity sake and to keep the thread focused, the named participants should not be allowed to post in the Peanut Gallery thread. They can read it and if desired take lessons from the content there, even incorporate that material into the original thread but not contribute to the Peanut Gallery thread. Edited by jar, : see AbEAnyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Genomicus Member (Idle past 1971 days) Posts: 852 Joined: |
I like this idea proposed by jar above. I also think that putting post limits on threads (with the exception of Free for All or Coffee House) will enhance the quality of discussion, as users won't be as inclined to "waste" their number of posts on making vacuous, low-quality comments.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4451 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.0
|
If we did return to post limits as the standard instead of the exception, what do people think it should be? I always disliked the limits. If limits are reinstated I would rather they were in the 800-1000 post range. What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I find myself agreeing with jar about this. If I had some choice in selecting participants I'd probably be much less likely to lose my temper for one thing. I'd also prefer to have less emphasis on the debate factor and more on the "understanding through discussion" factor if at all possible (though I realize that may be asking too much).
Otherwise I don't think things get any more confused with long threads than a welter of short ones, so I'd vote for having a high number of posts if there is to be a limit -- say 1000. abe: But really I prefer no limits. I like knowing all the opinions about gun control are somewhere on that extremely long thread for instance. It's not any harder to search a long thread than a hundred short threads to locate a particular opinion on the subject, in fact it's probably easier. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I don't think the OP should have any say in who represents the opposition. That seems absolutely counter productive. The originator should have input on who is in the supporting side.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024