Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9046 total)
122 online now:
AZPaul3, Christian7, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), nwr (4 members, 118 visitors)
Newest Member: Dade
Post Volume: Total: 887,272 Year: 4,918/14,102 Month: 516/707 Week: 71/176 Day: 34/37 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 12.0
Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3937
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 1 of 199 (416289)
08-15-2007 1:21 AM



Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Rob, posted 08-25-2007 3:21 PM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3937
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 3 of 199 (416301)
08-15-2007 2:18 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by arachnophilia
08-15-2007 1:30 AM


Re: can we change a thread title?
What would you suggest for the new title?

Adminnemooseus


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by arachnophilia, posted 08-15-2007 1:30 AM arachnophilia has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by arachnophilia, posted 08-15-2007 1:26 PM Adminnemooseus has responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3937
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 5 of 199 (416490)
08-15-2007 11:37 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by arachnophilia
08-15-2007 1:26 PM


Re: Gap Theory etc. - Adminnemooseus prefers to defer to opinion of another admin
This whole "Gap Theory" is outside of my realm. I would prefer that another admin more in touch with such enter an opinion and/or do any topic title change.

Perhaps because of the topic title question, the topic as a whole is terminally flawed. As such, perhaps it's best closed.

Other admins?

Adminnemooseus

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Change ID's.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by arachnophilia, posted 08-15-2007 1:26 PM arachnophilia has not yet responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3937
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 7 of 199 (417418)
08-20-2007 11:08 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by macaroniandcheese
08-20-2007 9:42 PM


Re: "in the center of the garden" thread
I agree. Topic in question moved to here in the "Bible Study" forum.

:) One quibble - Your message should have gone to the Considerations of topic promotions from the Proposed New Topics forumConsiderations of topic promotions from the Proposed New Topics forum

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Fix dBcode. Should have used the "preview" feature.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by macaroniandcheese, posted 08-20-2007 9:42 PM macaroniandcheese has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by macaroniandcheese, posted 08-21-2007 9:12 AM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3937
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 28 of 199 (419855)
09-05-2007 2:28 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by PaulK
09-04-2007 3:24 AM


Angeleic and Demonic Perceptions - The resolution
There was (as PaulK/AdminPaul already knows) a fair amount of discussion of this matter, in the "Private Administration Forum", more or less concluding here.

AdminBuzzsaw has posted his summary here, at the "Angelic and Demonic Possessions" topic.

Case closed.

Adminnemooseus


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by PaulK, posted 09-04-2007 3:24 AM PaulK has not yet responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3937
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 38 of 199 (420712)
09-09-2007 3:51 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by iceage
09-09-2007 3:22 AM


Re: Reference Added
Note: This is in reference to www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=7&t=209&m=20#20 -->www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=7&t=209&m=20#20">http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=7&t=209&m=20#20

The paper had been referenced in two prior posts.

I suspected such, but didn't feel like going searching for it. Regardless, I think it is also good and proper that it be credited/referenced in your message.

Thank you,
Adminnemooseus


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by iceage, posted 09-09-2007 3:22 AM iceage has not yet responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3937
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 89 of 199 (421881)
09-14-2007 10:03 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by jar
09-14-2007 9:24 PM


Adminnemooseus thinks it should have a topic of its own
Jar, I find that I must agree with both you and AdminBuz.

Yes, your comment does pertain to moderation procedures and thus is proper for this topic.

Some variation of it, however, has become your your standard message in this topic, more or less repeated whenever someone of the evolution side is suspended. Yes, the uneven or seeming uneven moderation treatment of evolutionists and creationists is a reality in this forum. And yes, it should be discussed.

But I think it merits its own topic in the Suggestions and Questions forum. This is because it is such a specialized issue AND because it is a distraction from the discussion of other moderation issues.

So, please do start a new "Uneven Moderation of Evolutionists and Creationists" topic. If you can come up with a better title, go for it.

Right now, I think any further discussion of such, in this topic, is itself cause for suspension. I'm sure you would like it, that you are being held to such higher standards. :)

Case closed in this topic.

Adminnemooseus


This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by jar, posted 09-14-2007 9:24 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by jar, posted 09-14-2007 10:05 PM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded
 Message 94 by arachnophilia, posted 09-14-2007 10:56 PM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded
 Message 98 by nator, posted 09-15-2007 7:19 AM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded
 Message 99 by jar, posted 09-15-2007 11:17 AM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded
 Message 116 by jar, posted 09-16-2007 9:07 PM Adminnemooseus has responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3937
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 117 of 199 (422391)
09-16-2007 11:13 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by jar
09-16-2007 9:07 PM


Why I suspended Jar
Thank you for starting the new topic, Moderation Procedures to level the playing field. Had you done such when I suggested such back in message 89 a lot of trouble could have been avoided.

I offhand have little to say on the matter of the suspension, beyond what I said at the "Suspensions and Bannings Part II" topic.

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.

Adminnemooseus


This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by jar, posted 09-16-2007 9:07 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by jar, posted 09-16-2007 11:18 PM Adminnemooseus has responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3937
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 119 of 199 (422397)
09-16-2007 11:36 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by jar
09-16-2007 11:18 PM


Re: Why I suspended Jar
Jar writes:

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.

Adminnemooseus, in message 89, writes:

Some variation of it, however, has become your your standard message in this topic, more or less repeated whenever someone of the evolution side is suspended. Yes, the uneven or seeming uneven moderation treatment of evolutionists and creationists is a reality in this forum. And yes, it should be discussed.

But I think it merits its own topic in the Suggestions and Questions forum. This is because it is such a specialized issue AND because it is a distraction from the discussion of other moderation issues.

So, please do start a new "Uneven Moderation of Evolutionists and Creationists" topic. If you can come up with a better title, go for it.

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.

Adminnemooseus

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Change ID.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by jar, posted 09-16-2007 11:18 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by jar, posted 09-16-2007 11:43 PM Adminnemooseus has not yet responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3937
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 135 of 199 (422737)
09-18-2007 3:37 AM
Reply to: Message 134 by iceage
09-18-2007 1:44 AM


Leaving the message unhidden, at least for now
But is there any reason why HEWG's graffiti in the angular unconformities thread couldn't be removed?

I was about the use the "hide" code, which would render all of the message invisible other than via the "peek" mode. But then I wondered if it be best that the message remain free of any "edited by an admin" message. As such there is evidence that there was no admin tampering with the message - There can be no charge of a frame up.

Adminnemooseus


This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by iceage, posted 09-18-2007 1:44 AM iceage has not yet responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3937
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 199 of 199 (424461)
09-27-2007 4:10 AM


Closing time comes early
If anyone wants to further debate what an ad hominem, it better be in a specialized topic and not in the version 13 of the "General Discussion..." topic. Likewise for any other specialized type focuses.

Adminnemooseus


Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021