Proposal for Moose vs. Frog Great Debate

Many here have noticed that there have been some clashes between Adminnemooseus and Crashfrog.This boils down to the point that it is AM's opinion that Crashfrog is part of a significant problem at this forum, in that he posts too many messages.I think this situation has forum wide implications.Frog, care to do a one-on-one discussion of this? I'm really not looking for a "scored" debate, but that can be done, if the masses want such.Comments from others?The sometimes cranky,
Moose[This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 02-04-2004]

---

Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.
"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham

To me, Crashfrog is the greatest, and most prominent of our prolific evolution side posters. As such, I thought he would be the one, to have a concise discussion with over what I deem to be a serious problem.The short version of my argument:While strives to be a fair place for creationists, in no way can it be said, even in the best of circumstances, that it is "creationist friendly".The evolution side should not "pile on" our limited supply of creationists. Do you expect that a massive (and redundant) assault is going to succeed in "pounding some reason" into their heads? Or is it only going to trigger further irrational behavior?Also, is this "shark feeding frenzy" mentality going to drive off the more rational contingency of the creationist movement? I am inclined to think "Yes".Also, is the dominance and heavy posting by a relatively small number of evolution sided members going to discourage the participation of other evolutionists? Might there be the situation that "After Crashfrog's done, there's little room to say more." If all the other evolution side members decided to sit out for a week, would Crashfrog's normal posting level cover all the creationist sides messages?Then there's the "out of control" topics. 105 new messages in one topic, in 23 hours! What redundancy, looping, etc. is happening? How many of these messages ever get a chance to be read by most of the interested members? What profound individual message might have gotten buried, never to be seen? What profound messages were never posted, because the member had the sanity not to get involved in the frenzy?Continuing on the theme of the previous paragraph, what about the overall bulk of daily messages, in all the active topics? On 2/3 we had 57 active topics, and 501 new messages. What most worthy message was lost in the clutter?I remind you of the "Dealing with waste of time threads and their posters..." topic.Also, Dan Carroll's "POTM" nomination:

quote:

---

Is it possible to nominate a two-poster winner "thread of the month"?

​

Because I'll go with Natural Selection for Mike T. W., the posters in question being DBlevins and Mike the Wiz.

​

No combat, just an honest attempt to teach someone, without any pressure for the person being taught to accept the idea or not before they have (and understand) all the facts.

---

What is the state of , when a topic (rightfully) gets a "POTM" for such reasons?We have a lot of chaos happening, and the evo side can't blame it all on the creationists. Some evo's need to cool their jets also.Well, maybe not so short.Moose (exit rant mode){Edited to add a few more question marks}[This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 02-05-2004]

The second sentence, of my message 1:

quote:

---

This boils down to the point that it is AM's opinion that Crashfrog is part of a significant problem at this forum, in that he posts too many messages.

---

The opening sentence, of my message 23:

quote:

---

To me, Crashfrog is the greatest, and most prominent of our prolific evolution side posters.

---

Also in message 23:

quote:

---

The evolution side should not "pile on" our limited supply of creationists.

---

and

quote:

---

Also, is the dominance and heavy posting by a relatively small number of evolution sided members

---

All "bolds" added here.I thought I was pretty clear, that I didn't think that Crashfrog was the all of what I perceived to be a problem. I just find him to be the most prominent, and thus to be the "representative sample", or perhaps the "gang leader".I do suspect that, overall, Crashfrog does have the most messages per day, although I haven't done specific calculations. Also, I think that NosyNed is less confrontationial in his approach. Crashfrog is blunt (but still proper), Ned is more diplomatic. Indeed, a significant number of the NosyNed postings (both pre and post AdminNosy) are really of moderator nature. This is why Adminnemooseus chose NosyNed as a moderator, and not Crashfrog.Moose[This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 02-05-2004]

quote:

---

I thought this was a sketchy topic for a Great Debate but now I begin to see the merit. Nontheless I don't think I can honestly claim to possess the discipline and organization that a Great Debate requires. Maybe we should chat a little more about it here? As a kind of potential "pre-debate"?

---

I thought what I was intending to cover at the proposed "Great Debate" was largely covered in this topic. I think Crashfrog was actually conceding point to me (wow!). That's why I let it all drop. I never wanted a real formal "GD", just a one-on-one discussion of the issue(s).Now, with the Desdamona situation we've just gone through, I thought it was time to give this topic a bump.Essentially, I've advocating that our large supply of evolutionists strive to not "pile on" our limited supply of creationists. With Dez, we had an rather extreme fundimentalist, very weak in science, single-handedly going up against quite a number of heavily armed evolutionists. She is/was caught up in a mob of opponents (For those who may not know, there's also Sylas's A little rant for desdamona).I also note that RAZD might well be taking over the title of "most enthusiastic" poster, that I had previously tagged Crashfrog with.I invite those who haven't previously read this topic, to do such. Also, see the "Change in Moderation?" topic, that the Adminnemooseus puts in his signature. Or at least look at the Percy/Admin messages there.Cheers,
Moose

---

Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.
"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham