What can we do to liven this place up?

I agree with all your msg 6 points, Nem, and especially the above. You're a valuable asset to the board, both as admin and sensible participant in the public forums.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

That's right. Science is Percys elitist concern, to the extent that there is allegedly no ID science, hence no legit ID science debate, so far as I can assertain. You want elitist, you get deadsville in science. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

But science people seem to like debating Randman to the point that they follow him to showcase just to have a bout with him. Randman surfaces some arguments nobody else will touch. That's some of the diversity that livens up the place, regardless of how much one may agree or disagree with the man. It appears he studies a lot and is being more competent in science.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

I`d like to see a post word limit. We all are here for a limited time (I assume), and long posts tend to consume too much time and intellectual effort.
Holmes makes me doze off waiting for him to get to the point. Or addressing too many points in the one post.
While Razzy goes long, there is usually good mojo in there to make it worth the time.
Brad has shortened considerably, but his longies leave me in a state of stupefaction. I only endure for the sight of some new word birthing and a scuttle to Dict.com for possible verification.
While Randy`s frothing at the mouth for extended periods drives me away.
To sum up, how`s about a 200 word limit to force contributors to smarten up their post? Anything longer gets the chop.(I can see admins saying 'Oh, no, now we have to do word counts as well'.

quote:

---

I`d like to see a post word limit. We all are here for a limited time (I assume), and long posts tend to consume too much time and intellectual effort.

---

Don't read long posts. Your problem is solved!Me, I like intellectual effort. And if I don't have the time to read a long post, then I probably don't have the time to be on the internet to begin with.There are occassions when I think the posts are too long to be worth the effort to read carefully, usually because the topic is only slightly interesting. In that case, I find just reading the responses to the long post to be good enough -- I usually get a good enough idea of what the original post said.Honestly, this belongs more in the "Controversial Opinions" thread. Especially if you can work the word "rape" into it somehow.

---

Kings were put to death long before 21 January 1793. But regicides of earlier times and their followers were interested in attacking the person, not the principle, of the king. They wanted another king, and that was all. It never occurred to them that the throne could remain empty forever. -- Albert Camus

Tsk,tsk, Chiro, you missed the point. Most long posts just revolve around the argument the poster is trying to assemble. Sort of thinking out aloud on the run. Abbreviating the post MIGHT encourage contributors to write a more concise summary (oxymoron?). Lengthy posts could lead to rival debaters getting the wrong slant on what was being proposed. Leading to more friction on the boards. Something Percy is trying to dampen.

Hi, Bri.Well, we could invite our friendly peers (evolutionist to evolutionist, creationist to creationist) to engage in an exemplar exchange to show how elite debate is conducted--and then call their perspective ignorant, their arguments tripe.That stirs things up, hm?Otherwise, once you rule out those who challenge science at its fundament, nothing is left but the most recent journal reports, and wire services/Google Scholar do that nicely, thanks.Hell, just buy one of Dawkins' books. Put your feet up.Corporate. Tweed.

---

Drinking when we are not thirsty and making love at any time, madam, is all that distinguishes us from the other animals.-Pierre De Beaumarchais (1732-1799) Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

Give them X amount of bandwidth inches at average font size. No counting needed.

Or have a simple javascript applet to count the words as you type, forbidding any more than the allowance.

quote:

---

And most people on EvC hate creationism and theism.

---

I think you flatter your side.

I don't recall saying that one needed science based arguments in the science forum. Merely evidentially based arguments.Unlike others, such as the faith forums, where you don't need evidence to further your logic.How is that being elitist?

Thank you good sir. I can say the same for you without reservation. And while we're on the topic, it would only make this place even more dull without your participation. People such as you and I have beliefs that run counter to most of the members on here. And now that we've lost quite a few Christians to attrition, it appears that you and I are the last of the Mohicans.

---

"With derision the atheist points out that there can be no God because this world is so unfair. Without hesitation, I concur with him. Indeed, we live in an unfair world because of all sorts of social ills and perils. I must not contend with such a sentiment because it is factual-- we don't live in a fair world. Grace is unambiguous proof that we live in an unfair world. I received salvation when I deserved condemnation. Yes, indeed this world is unfair." -Andrew Jaramillo-

quote:

---

And most people on EvC hate creationism and theism.

---

If that's flattery I'd hate to see what a swift kick to the genitals would be considered...

My memory isn't great, but weren't you one of those guys who was all up in my face when I confessed to not reading Holmes' massive missives all the way through?

I vaguely remember you admitting not reading some of holmes' posts all the way through while engaged in a debate/discussion/argument with him. Is this Nighttrain's problem? That his attention span is too short to engage in an interesting discussion? I thought he was just complaining that long posts were interfering with his lurking enjoyment. Sorry for the confusion.

---

Kings were put to death long before 21 January 1793. But regicides of earlier times and their followers were interested in attacking the person, not the principle, of the king. They wanted another king, and that was all. It never occurred to them that the throne could remain empty forever. -- Albert Camus