Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8965 total)
60 online now:
caffeine, dwise1, jar, JonF, PaulK, vimesey (6 members, 54 visitors)
Newest Member: javier martinez
Post Volume: Total: 873,105 Year: 4,853/23,288 Month: 1,758/1,286 Week: 72/353 Day: 19/53 Hour: 1/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Changes at EvC Forum
nator
Member (Idle past 620 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 28 of 191 (451031)
01-25-2008 6:14 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by arachnophilia
01-25-2008 12:57 AM


quote:
indeed, banning the people who object is the surest way to get brought down to the level of uncommon descent, or any other creationist-run board were the bias is literally in the forum rules. further, it's a fast and effective way to destroy the community that many of the as-yet-unbanned people used to know and love. i can't speak of others, but i know my desire to post has gone way down. maybe the forum will eventually recover; maybe not. but it sure won't be the same without people like omni, side, nwr, ringo... all those old-timers you spoke of that form the backbone of the community here. yeah, it's always the same old fight -- but it has been for the last 150 years. it always will be.

percy, if you choose to ban me for speaking my mind, i can't stop you. you've banned almost everyone else who did, the people that normally ensured fair moderation. the new system, i'll get over it. but i can't just stand by while all the valued members of the this forum either leave on their own or are forced to leave by you. i'm concerned for the well-being of the site and the community, and i am sincerely disappointed and worried by the absences left by people you have indefinitely suspended for reasons that run counter to everything this place used to stand for. i don't know what will become of EvC, but this is, in my humblest of opinions, not a good first foot forward. you've always listened to reason in past, percy, something i have greatly respected. please don't stop now.


Seconded.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by arachnophilia, posted 01-25-2008 12:57 AM arachnophilia has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 620 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 29 of 191 (451033)
01-25-2008 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by arachnophilia
01-25-2008 4:25 PM


Re: Free For All Restored to Life
quote:
i do not see the shift from "democracy" to "totalitarian dictatorship" as a good thing. maybe you do -- but a lot of people are now afraid to post discussing this issue lest they be dragged out into the street and shot, so to speak. and those who aren't... well, board activity is way down.

and what is really going on with these seemingly random indefinite suspensions? i can't even figure what jar did, if anything. brenna got banned for showing concern for your wellbeing. i think everyone's upset about this. why are you banning old and formerly valued members of the community?


I am, frankly, appalled at all of these suspensions.

Percy, explain yourself.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by arachnophilia, posted 01-25-2008 4:25 PM arachnophilia has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 620 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 71 of 191 (451192)
01-26-2008 5:35 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Admin
01-25-2008 6:48 PM


Re: Brief Answers
quote:
Things are simpler now. I've removed those who I felt were the most divisive elements and also those who requested it. For those of you for whom the changes and suspensions are truly unendurable then there are other alternative than just excoriating me, which won't do anything except make me feel bad.

You should feel bad, because banning people from a debate board for being divisive is a pretty nonsensical thing to do.

And I'm not surprised that people like Buzsaw, ICANT, and to some extent, Moose, would be in support of your actions.

They all lean towards the dictatorial, Authoritarian mindset, and now it seems that you have embraced this way of solving problems as well.

That, frankly, sucks.

Edited by nator, : No reason given.

Edited by nator, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Admin, posted 01-25-2008 6:48 PM Admin has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by Buzsaw, posted 01-26-2008 6:11 PM nator has responded
 Message 76 by anglagard, posted 01-26-2008 6:31 PM nator has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 620 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 72 of 191 (451195)
01-26-2008 5:51 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by ICANT
01-26-2008 2:20 PM


Re: Brief Answers
quote:
I think the first thing we need to do is shut up.

I think that is absolutely the last thing we should do.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by ICANT, posted 01-26-2008 2:20 PM ICANT has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 620 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 73 of 191 (451198)
01-26-2008 5:56 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by ICANT
01-26-2008 2:36 PM


Re: Re-Uproar
quote:
You are a bunch of the most ungrateful people I have ever seen in my entire 68 years of life.

Percy has provided us a place to air our views free of charge.


He won't take money. We've offered.

quote:
I have enjoyed being able to be a part of EvC.
I know to most I have some very off beat views about everything.
This is the only place I have ever found that I can really express them and get somebody to make me question them and for that I am forever grateful.

What you don't seem to understand is that what Percy has done with his mass purge of "undesireables" critical of him is made this place less of a place that welcomes freedom of expression.

quote:
Now for EvC's sake shut up and let Percy do his job.

It is for EvC's sake that we are speaking up.

quote:
Just so you know if I was in his position and I saw one more negative remark of any kind concerning the decisions that have been made I would shut this site down so fast your computers might crash because of it.

Right, becasue you don't really believe in freedom of expression.

At least, not enough to tolerate criticism of your own actions.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by ICANT, posted 01-26-2008 2:36 PM ICANT has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 620 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 74 of 191 (451199)
01-26-2008 6:00 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by ICANT
01-26-2008 3:24 PM


Re: Re-Uproar
quote:
He did what he thought was best.

And banning lots of people for apparently no good reason was a bad decision.

It seriously damaged the integrity of this place.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by ICANT, posted 01-26-2008 3:24 PM ICANT has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 620 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 77 of 191 (451210)
01-26-2008 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Buzsaw
01-26-2008 6:11 PM


Re: Brief Answers
They all lean towards the dictatorial, Authoritarian mindset, and now it seems that you have embraced this way of solving problems as well.

quote:
Nator you have absolutely no evidence supportive of your charges.

Of course I do:

quote:
Please, Nator, don't become part of the problem Admin's trying to fix.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Buzsaw, posted 01-26-2008 6:11 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 620 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 109 of 191 (451310)
01-27-2008 8:13 AM
Reply to: Message 86 by arachnophilia
01-26-2008 11:30 PM


Re: suggesting considering this is debate site
quote:
equality in moderation would not anger me in the slightest. i think it was a good thing, and would be a good thing, and it's something i've argued for in the past. i think many "evos" here would agree, too. it's the only real way to ensure fairness in moderation. so long as the moderators follow the rules themselves and don't go, you know, randomly banning people they disagree with.

Yes, precisely.

That's why AdminBuz is worth his weight in gold around here.

He's a good moderator and could certainly teach Percy a thing or two right about now.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by arachnophilia, posted 01-26-2008 11:30 PM arachnophilia has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 620 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 132 of 191 (451812)
01-28-2008 6:14 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by arachnophilia
01-28-2008 2:25 PM


oh sure, I can already see the quality improvement
Jesus, we lose Ringo and nwr but randman now has full posting privilages.

Wow, the quality of debate is simply bound to improve.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by arachnophilia, posted 01-28-2008 2:25 PM arachnophilia has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by randman, posted 01-28-2008 6:25 PM nator has responded

nator
Member (Idle past 620 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 133 of 191 (451816)
01-28-2008 6:18 PM
Reply to: Message 131 by Admin
01-28-2008 4:23 PM


So Dan is too threatening, now? He's on the list of undesireables?

Gee, is the fact that I am still unhappy with the pogrom you have enacted make my days here numbered too, percy?

Should I be watching what I say?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by Admin, posted 01-28-2008 4:23 PM Admin has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by Hyroglyphx, posted 01-28-2008 7:13 PM nator has responded
 Message 138 by Buzsaw, posted 01-28-2008 8:31 PM nator has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 620 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 148 of 191 (451914)
01-29-2008 7:38 AM
Reply to: Message 134 by randman
01-28-2008 6:25 PM


Re: oh sure, I can already see the quality improvement
quote:
We could just ban all the creationists and IDers or maybe except a handful? Is that better?

Heavens, no, you (utterly predictably) misrepresent me.

The people who should be banned (or stay banned, as it were) are the people who do not seem to be able or willing to follow the forum guidelines.

...the guidelines which, in part, state:

8. Avoid any form of misrepresentation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by randman, posted 01-28-2008 6:25 PM randman has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 620 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 149 of 191 (451915)
01-29-2008 7:41 AM
Reply to: Message 136 by Hyroglyphx
01-28-2008 7:13 PM


Re: Indisensable liberties aren't for sale
Should I be watching what I say?

quote:
Apparently everyone seems to think so, nator, which accounts for the tip-toeing around.

I think I'll just consign myself to chat.


Personally, I don't plan on watching what I say at all. Not in this "new" way, anyhow.

If Percy wants to ban me for criticizing his actions, and thus show himself to be no better than any of the Creationist board moderators, then so be it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Hyroglyphx, posted 01-28-2008 7:13 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 620 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 150 of 191 (451916)
01-29-2008 7:43 AM
Reply to: Message 144 by Buzsaw
01-29-2008 12:18 AM


Re: Indisensable liberties aren't for sale
quote:
Perhaps some (I say some) have been have been too dominant filling up the threads with responses having little edifying and significant substance, too often with intent to antagonize.

So what?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by Buzsaw, posted 01-29-2008 12:18 AM Buzsaw has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 620 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 157 of 191 (452201)
01-29-2008 5:56 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by Granny Magda
01-29-2008 7:43 AM


Re: Indisensable liberties aren't for sale
quote:
Providing an explanation of exactly why people have been suspended, in the appropriate thread, as per normal practice might be a good start in dispelling the bad blood.

Percy has already "explained" in Message #18 of this thread:

I'm only issuing indefinite suspensions to members who specifically request it, or who indicate by the nature of a reply that they would be a divisive presence in moving forward. In some circumstances I weighed past history.

In other words, Percy didn't like the criticism he got from some of these people so gave them the boot.

Of course, Brenna didn't criticise but instead offered sympathy and help and got booted, so I guess Percy just doesn't like her or something.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Granny Magda, posted 01-29-2008 7:43 AM Granny Magda has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 620 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 158 of 191 (452202)
01-29-2008 5:59 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by Buzsaw
01-29-2008 10:56 AM


Re: Business As Usual?
quote:
It appears that a number of old timers want business as usual. The problem is that business as usual has been running the site down.
Unfortunately change involves members, some of who have been our friends. It appears that Admin is eliminating some who he regards as reluctant to change.

It doesn't look that way to me.

It looks to me like Percy killed off the people who he had clashed with in the past, and therefore doesn't like to have to deal with, and when criticized for it, he gave some of those people the boot, too.

I still don't have any idea why Brenna was cleansed from the site.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by Buzsaw, posted 01-29-2008 10:56 AM Buzsaw has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by arachnophilia, posted 01-30-2008 3:51 AM nator has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020