The problem with EVC

Well there has to be determination of some threshold level of acceptability by someone, or it would just turn into a cluttered free-for-all. Probably, but that’s part of the challenge isn’t? Not just winning a debate but trying to provide the most understandable explanation of things? Where’s your competitive instinct? How is that different from the process of peer review in real science?
There have to be standards of performance and someone has to play referee.
I think it’s a fair replica of the real science world, imperfect though they both are. I’m not so sure. Futile if your purpose is to convert Christians back to an atheist world view, yes, but not if you get satisfaction from pointing out all the fallacies of their arguments and preventing them from flogging dogma as science to those who are here to actually learn something. So haven’t you learned anything in the process of your debating? I mean, I don’t have an image of chirstians much different from yours, but I could care less about their narrow-minded dogma. I am here to clarify what evolution is really about and what it is useful for to those who are interested in learning and have sincere questions. Also to address challenges to my own conceptual framework that may be posed by the more educated and intelligent of the membership. It is only a product of its members. If you feel it is stagnant, you are partly responsible as a member, or at least you are empowered to change that by introducing some new ideas.

Robin, this sounds like a big bunch of sour grapes you had for breakfast. Try a change of diet...

Well, if we want to follow the analogy - no. In the sense that graduate students are not qualified to be journal editors and referees. Unfortunately the peer review system is a tiered system where experience and qualifications determine your ranking. Given your own comments, would you want all members of the forum to have equal ranking to pass judgement on the posts of others (other than simply not replying)? The only qualification to show up here is a computer and an internet connection, so I think we need some qualified and impartial moderators to pass judgement once in a while. You could look at it that way (no offense taken). I prefer to consider it comparable to the satisfaction one derives from teaching a good lecture - you just don't see all the student's faces. You shouldn't let the attitudes of some of the creo's upset you or color your learning experience.
Pick your debates carefully and ignore the pedantic crap.
I would also point out that learning anything complex can be a daunting process and a struggle. Sometimes we only learn something because we have had to deal with problems that seem very annoying and frustrating at the time. That's normal in science as well. Chin up and keep posting

Absolutely.
As a researcher, I don't do much teaching, but there is no better exercise for clarifying your own concepts than having to explain them lucidly to someone else - especially when you meet with some resistance