Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-27-2019 3:58 AM
25 online now:
Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), Pressie (2 members, 23 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: ooh-child
Post Volume:
Total: 854,844 Year: 9,880/19,786 Month: 2,302/2,119 Week: 338/724 Day: 1/62 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 10.0
Jaderis
Member (Idle past 1598 days)
Posts: 622
From: NY,NY
Joined: 06-16-2006


Message 17 of 305 (383359)
02-07-2007 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by subbie
02-07-2007 7:05 PM


Re: Lies and liars
I understand that forum guidelines include the admonition

Always treat other members with respect. Argue the position, not the person. Avoid abusive, harassing and invasive behavior. Avoid needling, hectoring and goading tactics.

and that calling someone a liar would run counter to this.

I agree that calling someone a liar is not in the spirit of EvC, but I think that in the case of Crash in my thread he "argued the position, not the person."

He asserted that the arguments NJ presented were falsehoods.

I second subbie's request for clarification on how to call someone on a lie or a misrepresentation of a source or another member (and find out whether it is deliberate or not) without approaching any "line."


This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by subbie, posted 02-07-2007 7:05 PM subbie has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by AdminQuetzal, posted 02-07-2007 8:10 PM Jaderis has responded

  
Jaderis
Member (Idle past 1598 days)
Posts: 622
From: NY,NY
Joined: 06-16-2006


Message 23 of 305 (383398)
02-07-2007 9:14 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by AdminQuetzal
02-07-2007 8:10 PM


Re: Lies and liars
I agree with your advisement to find more creative ways to call someone on a lie/misrepresentation. I try to just point out the lie with evidence instead of getting into name calling.

However, I have one quibble.

You say

You will note that crash DID NOT directly accuse NJ of lying. However, I am absolutely certain crash was fully aware of what he was doing. To promulgate a falsehood while knowing it is a falsehood - crash's accusation here - is different from lying how, exactly?

and yet, you advise us to say

"your assertion doesn't appear to be supported by the evidence" is a good one in science threads. "That turns out not to be the case", and "that is not entirely accurate"

which is still, in essence, calling someone a liar.

I know Crash can be somewhat, shall we say, fiery and maybe that approach is what you and others object to. If so, you should come out and say it.

I still back him up in this case, tho, because what he said was that maybe NJ was having a hard time providing asked for evidence because the claims he made were false. That doesn't necessarily mean that he thought that NJ was deliberately lying as you suggest, but that he made some claims and when asked to back them up he couldn't do it because the arguments were lies and the evidence doesn't exist (the truth of this matter remains to be seen...I am just making a point).

Then again, he may well "know what he is doing", but so would the person who says "your assertion is not supported by the evidence."

They are saying the same thing.

{ABE: I do realize that you and the other admins are indeed fair. I am not trying to be argumentative for argument's sake. I appreciate (and I'm sure Crash does as well) the warning and the clarification.}

Edited by Jaderis, : grovelling


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by AdminQuetzal, posted 02-07-2007 8:10 PM AdminQuetzal has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by AdminQuetzal, posted 02-08-2007 8:02 AM Jaderis has not yet responded
 Message 26 by AdminModulous, posted 02-08-2007 10:38 AM Jaderis has not yet responded

  
Jaderis
Member (Idle past 1598 days)
Posts: 622
From: NY,NY
Joined: 06-16-2006


Message 70 of 305 (386689)
02-22-2007 11:49 PM


Regarding "100 Reasons" promotion
I am not an admin and I didn't think it was appropriate to post on the PNT, but if I could offer my two cents.

I think it should be promoted with the stipulation that any subsequent posts be additions or subtractions to the list - NO debate on the specific points. It should also be posted in the Reference Library and/or the Links and Information forum so that it isn't too difficult to find. Any new threads dealing specifically with one of the points should link back to this post, not only to give credit to anglagard, but to also help advertise the post to people who might not have stumbled across it yet.

Anyways...just thought I'd pipe in.

Carry on :)


  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019