Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General discussion of moderation procedures: The Sequel
deerbreh
Member (Idle past 2892 days)
Posts: 882
Joined: 06-22-2005


Message 271 of 300 (236457)
08-24-2005 1:31 PM
Reply to: Message 269 by PaulK
08-24-2005 12:52 PM


Re: Tal's signature line
Err - you are not being helpful here.
Let's keep this to discussing the merits of the question I raised, ok? I didn't intend this as an open opportunity to "bash" Tal, whatever I might think of the wisdom of his signature line.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 269 by PaulK, posted 08-24-2005 12:52 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 274 by PaulK, posted 08-24-2005 2:14 PM deerbreh has not replied

deerbreh
Member (Idle past 2892 days)
Posts: 882
Joined: 06-22-2005


Message 272 of 300 (236462)
08-24-2005 1:39 PM
Reply to: Message 270 by Monk
08-24-2005 1:26 PM


Re: Tal's signature line
Talking about taking a cattle prod to your wife to turn her into a lesbian so you can watch (her have sex with another lesbian) is not obscene? Maybe I am just old fashioned but that is not exactly "Little Miss Muffet", imo. OTOH, what exactly is a "tuffet"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 270 by Monk, posted 08-24-2005 1:26 PM Monk has not replied

CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 273 of 300 (236464)
08-24-2005 1:43 PM
Reply to: Message 270 by Monk
08-24-2005 1:26 PM


Re: Tal's signature line
quote:
Sorry deerbreh. Tal's signature should stand if he wants it to. As long as it doesn't violate forum guidelines, i.e. obscenity, profanity, etc. Tal's should be able to post any signature he wants despite of or because it is offensive to some.
Well it's agreed then, my new avatar is fine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 270 by Monk, posted 08-24-2005 1:26 PM Monk has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 275 by kjsimons, posted 08-24-2005 2:15 PM CK has not replied
 Message 276 by Monk, posted 08-24-2005 3:16 PM CK has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 274 of 300 (236473)
08-24-2005 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 271 by deerbreh
08-24-2005 1:31 PM


Re: Tal's signature line
The point is not so much to bash Tal as to point out what his .sig says to me. Tal should realist that .sigs usually say more about the person using htem than they do about anything else.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 271 by deerbreh, posted 08-24-2005 1:31 PM deerbreh has not replied

kjsimons
Member
Posts: 821
From: Orlando,FL
Joined: 06-17-2003
Member Rating: 6.7


Message 275 of 300 (236474)
08-24-2005 2:15 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by CK
08-24-2005 1:43 PM


Re: Tal's signature line
Well it's agreed then, my new avatar is fine.
Gangsta' JC, I love it!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by CK, posted 08-24-2005 1:43 PM CK has not replied

Monk
Member (Idle past 3923 days)
Posts: 782
From: Kansas, USA
Joined: 02-25-2005


Message 276 of 300 (236500)
08-24-2005 3:16 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by CK
08-24-2005 1:43 PM


Re: Tal's signature line
Whatever floats yer boat. JC might even like it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by CK, posted 08-24-2005 1:43 PM CK has not replied

deerbreh
Member (Idle past 2892 days)
Posts: 882
Joined: 06-22-2005


Message 277 of 300 (236514)
08-24-2005 4:06 PM


General comment about signature lines...
In my opinion a discussion board is about discussing things. Anything which inhibits open discussion ought to be carefully considered before posting. "Ad hominum" attacks on other posters, offensive sexist, racist, homophobic whatevers inhibit free discussion because they become the issue rather than the topic at hand. For myself, I have decided I can no longer respond to a post by Tal as long as he continues to use what I consider to be an offensive signature line. I would do the same with anyone else who refused to change something after I had pointed it out to them that I considered it to be offensive. If that means I don't post very often or at all, so be it. I cannot control what you choose to say or do to me, but I can control how I respond. Hey! There is a pretty good signature line.
Edit to add my new signature line....
This message has been edited by deerbreh, 08-24-2005 04:13 PM

"I cannot control what you choose to say or do to me, but I can control how I respond."

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by Faith, posted 08-24-2005 4:26 PM deerbreh has not replied
 Message 280 by randman, posted 08-24-2005 4:46 PM deerbreh has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 278 of 300 (236520)
08-24-2005 4:26 PM
Reply to: Message 277 by deerbreh
08-24-2005 4:06 PM


Re: General comment about signature lines...
There have to be limits on what can legitimately be labeled "offensive." Just disliking somebody's political sarcasm doesn't qualify to my mind. Tal's signature makes a political point satirically. Many of the signatures and avatars of my opponents on this site have been offensive to me in one way or another, though lately they seem to be less in-your-face, but I've only complained about one poster's suggesting Jesus' homosexuality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by deerbreh, posted 08-24-2005 4:06 PM deerbreh has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 279 by Trixie, posted 08-24-2005 4:37 PM Faith has not replied

Trixie
Member (Idle past 3705 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 279 of 300 (236526)
08-24-2005 4:37 PM
Reply to: Message 278 by Faith
08-24-2005 4:26 PM


Re: General comment about signature lines...
I don't think that trying to make fun of a piece of science you don't understand counts as political satire!! I find his sig offensive and wouldn't like to be the parent of a child who looks in on this board and has to explain the hot girl on girl action.
However, while I do find it offensive, I think it should be left as it is - that is poetic justice since the sig makes him appear like an uneducated moron.
Please note that I am not calling him an uneducated moron, his own sig is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by Faith, posted 08-24-2005 4:26 PM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 281 by NosyNed, posted 08-24-2005 4:51 PM Trixie has not replied

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 280 of 300 (236529)
08-24-2005 4:46 PM
Reply to: Message 277 by deerbreh
08-24-2005 4:06 PM


Re: General comment about signature lines...
You mean like whole threads titled "When Will Creationists Learn" and entirely based on a false premise, namely the people that reject ToE do so because they do not understand it, when in reality they do understand it and that's why they reject it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by deerbreh, posted 08-24-2005 4:06 PM deerbreh has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by deerbreh, posted 08-24-2005 5:21 PM randman has not replied
 Message 283 by Trixie, posted 08-24-2005 5:35 PM randman has not replied
 Message 284 by Jazzns, posted 08-24-2005 5:48 PM randman has replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 281 of 300 (236531)
08-24-2005 4:51 PM
Reply to: Message 279 by Trixie
08-24-2005 4:37 PM


Tal's sig
It isn't that I find the fool sig so offensive; it is that Tal put it there when he was given the evidence for genetic involvement in sexual orientation instead of responding in an appropriate place. It is another time when he has ducked when the discussion went beyond him.
I think he has an aversion to admitting to an error.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by Trixie, posted 08-24-2005 4:37 PM Trixie has not replied

deerbreh
Member (Idle past 2892 days)
Posts: 882
Joined: 06-22-2005


Message 282 of 300 (236554)
08-24-2005 5:21 PM
Reply to: Message 280 by randman
08-24-2005 4:46 PM


Re: General comment about signature lines...
I think it is generally a bad idea to pigeon hole people by saying things like "When Will Creationists Learn", yes.
OTOH, sometimes people demonstrate that they do not understand something and them I think it is ok to point out what you think they are missing as long as you don't do it repeatedly just to be annoying.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 280 by randman, posted 08-24-2005 4:46 PM randman has not replied

Trixie
Member (Idle past 3705 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 283 of 300 (236561)
08-24-2005 5:35 PM
Reply to: Message 280 by randman
08-24-2005 4:46 PM


Re: General comment about signature lines...
I think you'll find the title is "Why won't Creationists learn?" It is NOT "When will Creationists learn?" and it is a valid question. With all the scientific info given in posts on this board and with a desire to engage in scientific discussion, why won't they learn the basics of the science they are trying to rubbish? How can they know a theory is wrong if they don't actually know what the theory says? Why won't they learn what the theory says before they dismiss it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 280 by randman, posted 08-24-2005 4:46 PM randman has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 286 by Faith, posted 08-24-2005 6:04 PM Trixie has not replied

Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 284 of 300 (236568)
08-24-2005 5:48 PM
Reply to: Message 280 by randman
08-24-2005 4:46 PM


Re: General comment about signature lines...
In fact there is a post in that very thread answering your concern.
Message 33
ABE:
As noted, the thread is not called "When will Creationists Learn?".
The thread is about learning the theories in order to attack them properly and has nothing to do with acceptance of the ToE.
This message has been edited by Jazzns, 08-24-2005 03:50 PM

No smoking signs by gas stations. No religion in the public square. The government should keep us from being engulfed in flames on earth, and that is pretty much it. -- Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

This message is a reply to:
 Message 280 by randman, posted 08-24-2005 4:46 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 285 by randman, posted 08-24-2005 6:02 PM Jazzns has replied

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 285 of 300 (236574)
08-24-2005 6:02 PM
Reply to: Message 284 by Jazzns
08-24-2005 5:48 PM


Re: General comment about signature lines...
The thread is a crock of unproven horse manure without any redemptive qualities to it that I can see. I hate to use gross language, but it's the equivalent of an evolutionist's intellectual circle jerk.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 284 by Jazzns, posted 08-24-2005 5:48 PM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 287 by Jazzns, posted 08-24-2005 6:13 PM randman has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024