Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,878 Year: 4,135/9,624 Month: 1,006/974 Week: 333/286 Day: 54/40 Hour: 1/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 9.0
mick
Member (Idle past 5014 days)
Posts: 913
Joined: 02-17-2005


Message 34 of 301 (377726)
01-18-2007 3:13 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by AdminModulous
01-18-2007 2:22 AM


Re: Why you are restricted, again.
AdminModulous writes:
Remember, this is the Internet, and not Iran.
And remember that your usage of this board is at 'Darwinists' expense. That is Percy is paying his own money towards letting you moan about his and others biases. You have no rights to free speech here and silencing you here is not illegal in any country. You have been given a voice despite your constant, repeated and frequent insults, off topic posts and generally disruptive behaviour.
I find this (and especially the emboldened parts) remarkable!
The general humanist attitude of this forum has served it very well in forging a common place where what are extremely divisive subjects can be discussed. That humanist attitude includes the notion that everybody has the right to free speech. Now, I understand that Ray being permanently banned from these forums would not impact his freedom of speech in the sense that he could continue to post at alternative forums, but it would impact the humanist attitude of the EvC forum in showing that our reaction to a dissenting, annoying, maddening voice is to shut it up.
I do not know much about the background of this argument. But I must say that if I were to be confined to a "special" forum described as a "sandbox" as though I were a child, I would not post here again. Being restricted in that way is humiliating in a real sense. Not humiliating in the practical sense of our lives in the mundane world, but humiliating for the online personae we all adopt on this forum.
I agree with Ray that a permanent restriction to the "sandbox" forum is unfair and does not reflect well on the "liberal thinking" of the moderators.
mick
Edited by mick, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by AdminModulous, posted 01-18-2007 2:22 AM AdminModulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by CK, posted 01-18-2007 5:32 AM mick has replied
 Message 39 by PaulK, posted 01-18-2007 7:28 AM mick has not replied
 Message 40 by AdminModulous, posted 01-18-2007 8:06 AM mick has not replied
 Message 46 by arachnophilia, posted 01-18-2007 11:03 AM mick has not replied

mick
Member (Idle past 5014 days)
Posts: 913
Joined: 02-17-2005


Message 36 of 301 (377744)
01-18-2007 6:08 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by CK
01-18-2007 5:32 AM


Re: Why you are restricted, again.
Charles writes:
quote:
I do not know much about the background of this argument. But I must say that if I were to be confined to a "special" forum described as a "sandbox" as though I were a child, I would not post here again. Being restricted in that way is humiliating in a real sense. Not humiliating in the practical sense of our lives in the mundane world, but humiliating for the online personae we all adopt on this forum.
I agree with Ray that a permanent restriction to the "sandbox" forum is unfair and does not reflect well on the "liberal thinking" of the moderators.
So what's the alternative? either banning or allowing him to rant and disrupt other threads? How would you handle it?
I would hope that Ray might not be banned, and others could simply ignore any posts he makes that they consider irrelevant. Nobody is forcing anybody to devote pages of text to debating Ray if they don't want to.
I personally have never found the disruption of threads to be a problem except for when both parties decide they are going to have a long debate on the forum, which might be more suited to the chat room.
Mick
Edited by mick, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by CK, posted 01-18-2007 5:32 AM CK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by CK, posted 01-18-2007 6:11 AM mick has replied

mick
Member (Idle past 5014 days)
Posts: 913
Joined: 02-17-2005


Message 38 of 301 (377746)
01-18-2007 6:16 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by CK
01-18-2007 6:11 AM


Please stop replying to my posts: i find your comments boring
charles writes:
That's a reply about how the world should be - sadly it's not related to how the world is. It's ok saying "no is forced to debate Ray", but if you start a debate and it's dragged off course - at the very least, you get into the "please stop" "will a moderator stop this" etc.
Sorry, while you were writing your reply I was editing my post to add a final paragraph:
quote:
I personally have never found the disruption of threads to be a problem except for when both parties decide they are going to have a long debate on the forum, which might be more suited to the chat room.
Instead of asking for a moderator to step in, just invite the opponent to a converstaion in the coffee house or the chat room.
Basically, behave online the same way you behave in real life. When a bore sits next to you on the bus, you can talk to him and wait for your next stop, or you can tell him you'd rather not speak. What you can't do is ask for a moderator to ban him from the bus. Why shouldn't the same rule apply online?
PS. I don't want to talk to you any more because you're boring me.
Edited by mick, : No reason given.
Edited by mick, : No reason given.
Edited by mick, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by CK, posted 01-18-2007 6:11 AM CK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by ringo, posted 01-18-2007 10:29 AM mick has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024