I really think extending Rob's suspension is unwarranted. He is just doing the best he can.
While I agree it is reasonable to point out when they are off topic or posting irrelevancies or nonsense like the POTM post or misrepresenting just to have it on record for others reading the threads, I don't think it is reasonable to sanction them for doing so. They are incapable of behaving otherwise.
The value of folk like Rob lies in creating an opportunity for others to present messages that support positions. Remember it is not Rob folk are actually replying to but rather the far larger audience that reads the board yet seldom or never post.
You didn't mention the misconduct that resulted in the extension of Rob's suspension.
I didn't mention it because it is simply a continuation of the same behavior. I simply don't think it is possible for him to follow the rules and I think it is unreasonable to expect any different behavior.
I agree with Moose's suspension of bluegenes even though there is a high probability that what he said is the truth, while allowing Ray to continue pointless and false accusations in thread after thread. We know that the evo's are capable of behaving in a civilized manner and so they should be held to a higher standard.
He is simply behaving like the typical Biblical Christian. We need to understand that behavior such as his is the norm and about all they are capable of. It is unrealistic to expect any different behavior from a YEC or Biblical Christian.Aslan is not a Tame Lion
I don't think that Highestevolvedwhiteguy should have been suspended just for calling someone a shit cracker or being abusive. He is just a Biblical Christian and it is unreasonable to expect even civilized behavior from him, much less reason or rationality.
Come on, it was in a thread about "Aliens in the Bible" for crying out loud. How can you expect reason from someone who puts forth such a ridiculous thread in the first place.
I agree Buz. Brenna should be held to a far higher standard than the Biblical Christians, ID supporters, YECs or OECs. We know that Brenna is capable of civilized behavior and so she should be held to that standard. That is why the Biblical Christians need to be allowed to call people morons or say that they should be taken out and shot while others are suspended for minor infractions.Aslan is not a Tame Lion
I'm sorry but in case you didn't notice this thread is "General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 12.0" and what I am discussing is Moderator Procedures.
Just a hint: this is the right place to discuss moderation procedures and the fact that AdminBuzsaw can't understand that simply supports my contention that we should not try to hold Biblical Christians to the same standards as evolutionists.
Well if anything I have said is considered an attack on the individual I sincerely apologize. My intent is simply to try to allow everyone to have an opportunity to present the best defense of their position that is possible.Aslan is not a Tame Lion
Re: Adminnemooseus thinks it should have a topic of its own
Yes, your comment does pertain to moderation procedures and thus is proper for this topic.
Yet when I reply asking a simple question, "So the thread for discussing moderation procedures is not the place to discuss moderation procedures?", your response was to suspend me.
You also suggested a new thread to discuss the issue I have raised, and a threat to suspend anyone discussing that issue.
There was Message 90 where I asked a general question trying to get you to clarify your dictum in Message 89 and Message 92 where I simply pointed out that I try very hard never to address or attack personalities but only address messages and behavior.
Can you show in either of those posts where I did not follow your dictum?
However, if you will look at my posts after that I think you will find that I did NOT discuss the issue you suggested should go to a different thread.
One thing I will say, it that it is my impression that you rather blatantly quote mined my message 89, in your message 99. You focused in on one sentence and disregarded what was said on either side.c
While you might think that, I followed your Dictum. I did not discuss the issue you proscribed and asked what I felt was a pertinent question, one you still have not answered. In addition, what you said in the suspension thread:
I asked Jar to take a specialized moderation issue to a new specialized topic. He chose to refuse the request and thus continued to contribute to the disruption of the topic.
is blatantly false.
So once again, was there a reason for my suspension?
Had you started the new topic then, per my suggestion, the suspension and all the Jar / Adminnemooseus discussion between that message 89 and this current message would not have happened. Instead you chose to argue that the theme now in the new topic did belong in this topic. And etc.
I'm sorry but can you show me where I continued to argue that the theme now in the new topic belonged in this topic?
After your Dictum in Message 89 I posted two messages in this thread, Message 90 and Message 92. Where in those two messages did I discuss the proscribed issue? You don't have to answer that because the fact is, I did not continue discussing the issue.
As to creating the new PNT, I fear it actually takes me a while to get the wording the way I want. I'm sorry if I do not work fast enough to suit your standards.