Suspensions and Bannings

For a while Syamsu will get time to think about supporting his position (for a change). He can post to Suggestions and Questions as long as he behaves there. That means no rants just a question in a nice tone or a promise to try to do a better job.

Rusty, having demonstrated an unwillingness to be either co-operative or a good faith debator has been banned. Part of this is suspicion of registering under multiple names.(edited for spelling)This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 11-08-2004 09:57 AM

You ought not have told him. {Added by Adminnemooseus - I seriously agree. I've taken the liberty to edit the information out of Percy's message. I also remind all that this topic is intended to be a recording keeping topic, not a place to debate what was done.}This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 11-08-2004 01:06 PM

Jims privileges have been restored as long as there is no more name calling.

SlV has not shown an intent to debate in good faith.A chance to read more carefully seems to be a good idea.

---

New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.

​

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum

​

Other useful links:

​

Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting

SlV has been reinstated a bit early for good behaviour.Well, , he hasn't posted anything bad has he?I had not banned him ourright. I had removed access to most of the fora and left suggestions and questions (and one other) open to him.

I suspended Randman yesterday for parroting things that he has been informed are wrong before.see Message 187I neglected to "announce" it.This is announcing the lifting of that suspension as well.

see msg:
Message 151 for the reason.This is intended as far as I am concerned to be indefinite. Others may choose differently.

Since faith chose to delete the interesting msg and expected to be banned for it I have obliged.It is childish and not a habit that I want to encourage since it disrupts others ability to follow the threads.

I have been thinking about that after reading it too. I have been away and will make a post in awhile.

I will lift the suspension in the non evidence forums and add an explanation about the POTM. I had not seen the reposting of the information elsewhere before I did the full suspension and reacted hastily.

TC's privileges have been restored.

JohnDM seems to have a passion for numerlogical nonsense. He hasn't gotten the hint from Jar's rejections so I've suspended him for a day.

See Message 175Faith brings up her old ideas that were inadequately defended in threads where they belonged. She operates on a foundation of ignorance about the sciences she wishes to discuss, seems to be impervious to leaning and helps cause threads to spin wildly out of control.If any admin feels like it has been long enough they should reinstate. This should not be until Aug 2 at the earliest.This message has been edited by AdminJar, 07-31-2005 08:46 PM

I mean it when I say the "Why is TOE not accepted" thread is not to become a catch all for all topics that relate to evolutionary theory and more.Yaro didn't get the hint even when Faith mentioned my concerns. It won't be for a full day. I'll be back later.