Understanding through Discussion

QuickSearch

 Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ] EvC Forum active members: 64 (9046 total)
 158 online now: AZPaul3, kjsimons, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), nwr (4 members, 154 visitors) Newest Member: Dade Post Volume: Total: 887,272 Year: 4,918/14,102 Month: 516/707 Week: 71/176 Day: 34/37 Hour: 0/0

EvC Forum Board Administration Suggestions and Questions

# General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 12.0

Author Topic:   General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 12.0
EighteenDelta
Inactive Member

 Message 49 of 199 (420928) 09-10-2007 10:51 AM

Shilling
Is there any stated policy against 'shilling'? A suggestion is that you might include it into the rules or code of conduct.

If the term is unfamiliar...

 "Shilling" refers to the use of the board's resources, membership list, PM system, etc. to communicate in any form on behalf of a banned member.

Edited by EighteenDelta, : definition of shilling

"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."

"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves that You exist, and so therefore, by Your own arguments, You don't. Q.E.D."

"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

"Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.

EighteenDelta
Inactive Member

 Message 67 of 199 (421609) 09-13-2007 11:42 AM Reply to: Message 63 by RAZD09-12-2007 8:42 PM

 RAZD writes:It's a function of (annoyance)x(output)x(threads involved)/(content)

The first problem I see in this equation is that you are dividing by zero...

"Debate is an art form. It is about the winning of arguments. It is not about the discovery of truth. There are certain rules and procedures to debate that really have nothing to do with establishing fact â€” which creationists have mastered. Some of those rules are: never say anything positive about your own position because it can be attacked, but chip away at what appear to be the weaknesses in your opponent's position. They are good at that. I don't think I could beat the creationists at debate. I can tie them. But in courtrooms they are terrible, because in courtrooms you cannot give speeches. In a courtroom you have to answer direct questions about the positive status of your belief. We destroyed them in Arkansas. On the second day of the two-week trial we had our victory party!"
-Stephen Jay Gould

 This message is a reply to: Message 63 by RAZD, posted 09-12-2007 8:42 PM RAZD has responded

 Replies to this message: Message 68 by RAZD, posted 09-13-2007 12:06 PM EighteenDelta has not yet responded

 Date format: mm-dd-yyyy Timezone: ET (US)
 Newer Topic | Older Topic Jump to:Board Administration     The Public Record     Announcements     Proposed New Topics     Suggestions and Questions Science Forums     The Bible: Accuracy and Inerrancy     Big Bang and Cosmology     Dates and Dating     Education and Creation/Evolution     Biological Evolution     Geology and the Great Flood     Human Origins and Evolution     Intelligent Design     Is It Science?     Creation/Evolution Miscellany     Origin of Life Social and Religious Issues     Bible Study     Comparative Religions     Social Issues and Creation/Evolution     Faith and Belief     Theological Creationism and ID Side Orders     Coffee House     The Great Debate     Free For All     Post of the Month     Links and Information     Creation/Evolution In The News     The Book Nook     Columnist     Practice Makes Perfect Archives     Topic Proposals Archive     Showcase Retired Forums     Short Subjects (No new topics or messages)     Welcome visitors