General discussion of moderation procedures: The Sequel

http://< !--UB EvC Forum: Suspensions and Bannings (MESSAGES BY ADMIN ONLY) -->http://EvC Forum: Suspensions and Bannings (MESSAGES BY ADMIN ONLY) -->EvC Forum: Suspensions and Bannings (MESSAGES BY ADMIN ONLY)< !--UE-->
5/26/05 - Admin suspends peaceharris: http://< !--UB EvC Forum: May, 2005, Posts of the Month -->http://EvC Forum: May, 2005, Posts of the Month -->EvC Forum: May, 2005, Posts of the Month< !--UE-->
5/26/05 - minnemooseus gives peaceharris POTM for various contributions to the same topic. I commended peaceharris for the effort. I truly thought he was doing his best to present scientific arguments in the topic. The problem is, he is so (IMO) massively incompetent in understanding the principles of geology that his points of science tended to merge into some sort of fantasy. Or something like that.Bottom line - My opinion is that the peaceharris suspension was problematic. I may well be missing something, but my impression is that Admin suspended him for something along the lines of "failing to debate science in good faith". My impression is that peaceharris was "debating science as best he could".So, was peaceharris suspended for talking really bad geology?Comments?MooseAdded by edit: Further reading - A message from Admin, 9/30/04.This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 05-28-2005 02:42 AM

Thank you for your response.I fully understand why you and the other admins no longer want to be posting detailed reasonings for suspensions, but I think this situation was unusual and did merit a little extra exploration.I have added a footnote to my peaceharris POTM nomination, targeting this discussion.I repeat again something from the POTM message: In its own twisted sort of way, I think that the "Flood not the Cause of the Grand Canyon -- Not a Biased Opinion" topic has been something special because of peaceharris's contributions. It illustrates how/why the mainstream geologic thoughts on the matter are as strong as they are.So, is peaceharris in any position to say anything else at that topic, other than "I give up"?Mooseps: A link at the suspension message, leading to this discussion, might be a good thing. For some reason, Adminnemooseus is unable to place such a link.Added by edit: Do'h - I have just now found Admins suspension message at the "Flood not the Cause of the Grand Canyon -- Not a Biased Opinion" topic. The suspension was explained at that location, but that explanation was not linked to in the "Suspensions and Bannings (MESSAGES BY ADMIN ONLY)" topic.This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 05-28-2005 01:47 PM