Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 9.0
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 46 of 301 (377783)
01-18-2007 11:03 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by mick
01-18-2007 3:13 AM


Re: Why you are restricted, again.
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 think mod means to emphasize that posting here is a priveledge, not a right. we post at the personal cost of percy. he doesn't have to be fair -- he could ban anyone he simply feels is wasting his bandwidth. but he tries to give everyone a voice, even those that are highly disruptive.
the showcase is, in part, a way to give these people a voice -- an area they can control, where they can post anything they want, and even define whom they want to debate with and whom they do not. in the outside forum, they would be held to MUCH higher standards, and have far less control. if they want to whine about what they've got, i invite them all out to play with the big boys -- and be subject to the same rules as everyone else, under the same moderation.
and certainly, "shutting them up" is not the reaction. in part, this very thread is a check on that. we, the general population on the board, are a check on the administration here. i know i have influenced percy a number of times to withhold bans for creationists -- such as randman, who continues to complain. i still object to faith's ban.
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.
frankly, ray acts like a child. it's not just here -- he's one of the few members i know from other forums. his reputation preceedes him. we have very little influence on that. he's the laughing stock of talk-origins -- they mock him and attack him at every turn. almost everyone there knows his name, and his debate style, and ridicules him to point of open insults everytime he posts. to my knowledge, ray no longer posts there.
would ray prefer we do that here? does he see that as open and free debate? i think i demonstrated a few posts back that when a member does make fun of or antagonize ray, the mods actually step in to protect him -- because such behaviour is uncalled for, whoever does it.
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.
the choice seems to be a little sandbox area, or letting ray and others like him turn the whole board into a sandbox. ray does not like that there are certain rules of conduct, and would continue to derail every thread he posts in. he'd continue to complain because he'd end up with closed threads, suspended, or banned, and very quickly.
it's a working solution. what do you propose we do, exactly? i have my objections to it too. i think it confines debate, splitting evolutionists and creationists into two distinct groups that rarely talk to each other.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by mick, posted 01-18-2007 3:13 AM mick has not replied

AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 47 of 301 (377784)
01-18-2007 11:13 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by arachnophilia
01-18-2007 10:39 AM


Bannin[qs]
wk, do you suppose that this might be why we have so few creationists on this board -- we have shown a propensity for banning them? granted, for entirely legitimate reasons most of the time, but they sure do not see it that way.
It would be interesting to have actual statistics but I think you'll find that for every creo banned there are 10 who come; rant and give up when someone asks a hard question or two.
I also suggest that it isn't propensity for banning any particular viewpoint -- we ban specific behaviours. Your post suggests that it is creos who behave badly more frequently. If you think that why do you think that?
Edited by AdminNosy, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by arachnophilia, posted 01-18-2007 10:39 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by arachnophilia, posted 01-18-2007 11:20 AM AdminNosy has not replied

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 48 of 301 (377785)
01-18-2007 11:20 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by AdminNosy
01-18-2007 11:13 AM


Re: Bannings
It would be interesting to have actual statistics but I think you'll find that for every creo banned there are 10 who come; rant and give up when someone asks a hard question or two.
i see a lot of them who immediately run afoul of the admins these days.
I also suggest that it isn't propensity for banning any particular viewpoint -- we ban specific behaviours.
do you see any correlation, as an admin?
Your post suggests that it is creos who behave badly more frequently. If you think that why do you think that?
that was one of two possible implications, i suppose. the other is that admins are more likely to ban fundies than others. either way, i certainly see them getting in trouble and get banned more.
how many non-creationists are banned from the site? merely as a point of statistics?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by AdminNosy, posted 01-18-2007 11:13 AM AdminNosy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by AdminWounded, posted 01-18-2007 11:41 AM arachnophilia has replied

Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 49 of 301 (377786)
01-18-2007 11:22 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by arachnophilia
01-18-2007 10:39 AM


Re: Why you are restricted, again.
wk, do you suppose that this might be why we have so few creationists on this board -- we have shown a propensity for banning them?
That is certainly a contributing factor. There are obviously several elements to how that has an impact, firstly there is the choice a creastionist makes from lurking or looking over the forum as to whether they want to participate. If they think the moderation is biased or hostile they may well not wish to participate unless they are ready to put up a fight, possibly against a lot of people at once.
The second is that there is a form of selection going on as those creationists more prone to losing their temper or derailing a topic may find themselves banned for what the moderating team consider to be neutral guideline based reasons, although these may be perceived as biased.
Since a perceived bias is something which may predispose only the more determined and possibly the more combative creationist interlocutors it may be that those creationists most likely to participate in a forum they perceive as weighted against them are also those more likely to infringe the forum guidelines.
I realise this is a huge generalisation and there are a number of evo-skeptic members who manage to keep a relatively even keel, but I certainly think that there is a connection between the enforcing of the forum guidelines and the level of creationist participation on the board.
I don't know to what extent a Soapbox area like the Showcase forum effects this situation. Does it suggest that we are tolerant of other views or that we are arrogant and dogmatic and like to keep our creationists in a cage to poke with sticks?
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by arachnophilia, posted 01-18-2007 10:39 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by PaulK, posted 01-18-2007 11:39 AM Wounded King has replied
 Message 55 by arachnophilia, posted 01-18-2007 12:56 PM Wounded King has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 50 of 301 (377789)
01-18-2007 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by Wounded King
01-18-2007 11:22 AM


Re: Why you are restricted, again.
quote:
I don't know to what extent a Soapbox area like the Showcase forum effects this situation. Does it suggest that we are tolerant of other views or that we are arrogant and dogmatic and like to keep our creationists in a cage to poke with sticks?
I'd say that the access controls on Showcase rule out the second possibility. If you want to poke the creationists you've got to get in the cage with them - and they can get you thrown out whenever they feel like it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Wounded King, posted 01-18-2007 11:22 AM Wounded King has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Wounded King, posted 01-18-2007 11:47 AM PaulK has not replied

AdminWounded
Inactive Member


Message 51 of 301 (377792)
01-18-2007 11:41 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by arachnophilia
01-18-2007 11:20 AM


Re: Bannings
how many non-creationists are banned from the site? merely as a point of statistics?
Since you don't have to specify your position in your profile I'm not sure this could eb done on anything more than an anecdotal basis, especially since by far the vast majority of current bannings are probably of member addresses used for spamming.
TTFN,
AW
P.S. looking at the first 100 or so bans most of them that aren't holdovers from the old board system are for spamming.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by arachnophilia, posted 01-18-2007 11:20 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by arachnophilia, posted 01-18-2007 12:58 PM AdminWounded has replied

Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 52 of 301 (377793)
01-18-2007 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by PaulK
01-18-2007 11:39 AM


Re: Why you are restricted, again.
It isn't so much the operation of Showcase as how it might be perceived by a newcomer to the boards. We might appreciate the factors you mention but someone just browsing the forums is just going to see a whole lot of creationists/IDers in Showcase talking amongst themselves about how hard done by they are and how they are kept down by the evo conspiracy that runs EvC.
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by PaulK, posted 01-18-2007 11:39 AM PaulK has not replied

Trixie
Member (Idle past 3706 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 53 of 301 (377796)
01-18-2007 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by arachnophilia
01-18-2007 10:39 AM


Where are all the creationists?
I tend to agree with what's been posted up thread by arach. The creationists we seem to have gathered are either uneducated in the sciences or are educated loonies. I don't mean to be insulting, I'm just telling it like I see it.
I truly believe that sensible creationists who are willing to debate in good faith take one look at the current creationist residents and run a mile. They don't want to be tarred with the same brush.
I think the only solution is to smile sweetly and nod your head in agreement with them, while pointedly ignoring any topic which is being derailed by them or which is being used to hurl abuse. Maybe when they realise they're being ignored because of their behaviour they will modify it. Especially if each person who chooses to ignore them posts the reason for it. How about a thread for "Who I'm ignoring and why"? Patterns would soon emerge and it would become apparent to everyone, troublemakers included, that certain behaviour isn't welcome.
One of the reasons I don't post here very much now is that I find it a waste of my time. Why should I bother to post on my relevant are of expertise, hunting out references, when any points will be ignored, dismissed with a hand wave or used to "prove" I'm an evil atheist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by arachnophilia, posted 01-18-2007 10:39 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Wounded King, posted 01-18-2007 12:19 PM Trixie has not replied
 Message 58 by arachnophilia, posted 01-18-2007 1:09 PM Trixie has not replied

Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 54 of 301 (377797)
01-18-2007 12:19 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Trixie
01-18-2007 12:10 PM


Re: Where are all the creationists?
I think the only solution is to smile sweetly and nod your head in agreement with them, while pointedly ignoring any topic which is being derailed by them or which is being used to hurl abuse.
If the problem is the current crop of creationists, i.e. our bonsai creationists in the terrarium, then surely the answer would be to axe the showcase and to simply ban those creationists, otherwise how would simply smiling and gazing vaguely into the distance be any more effective than consigning them to the showcase, which is itself largely ignored. They could still ask for reinstatement as normal members but would then be expected to conform to the guidelines if it was granted.
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Trixie, posted 01-18-2007 12:10 PM Trixie has not replied

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 55 of 301 (377804)
01-18-2007 12:56 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Wounded King
01-18-2007 11:22 AM


creationist worldview, suggestion
The second is that there is a form of selection going on as those creationists more prone to losing their temper or derailing a topic may find themselves banned for what the moderating team consider to be neutral guideline based reasons, although these may be perceived as biased.
i think they are, by ceationists. speaking as a former fundamentalist myself (i don't mean to be insulting), there is a deeply paranoid streak that runs through certain fundamentalist churches (most that i have been to). many really it see it "us vs. the world."
any approach that is not openly in favor of anything they do can be seen as an attack.
Since a perceived bias is something which may predispose only the more determined and possibly the more combative creationist interlocutors it may be that those creationists most likely to participate in a forum they perceive as weighted against them are also those more likely to infringe the forum guidelines.
this might be the case. perhaps we are sacring off the more reasonable, level-headed fundamentalists.
I realise this is a huge generalisation and there are a number of evo-skeptic members who manage to keep a relatively even keel,
but i think the definitions are also against us -- any creationist who is level-headed seems to be deemed "not a christian" by more vocal and combative creationists here. i don't see a good solution -- the creationists won't be happy unless they run the board. running their own section is not good enough, it seems.
but I certainly think that there is a connection between the enforcing of the forum guidelines and the level of creationist participation on the board.
i have a proposal. it's a dangerous one, but maybe it'll give some perspective. think of it like an experiment: what would happen if the board had no moderation for say a month? no pnt's, no closing topics, no reprimands, suspensions and bannings. only spam removal. would the entire thing be a sandbox, full of violent fights? would the creationists be happy? what would happen?
I don't know to what extent a Soapbox area like the Showcase forum effects this situation. Does it suggest that we are tolerant of other views or that we are arrogant and dogmatic and like to keep our creationists in a cage to poke with sticks?
poking with sticks. even though they are far more likely to be poked outside of the cage. it's still seen as patronizing and insulting.
Edited by arachnophilia, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Wounded King, posted 01-18-2007 11:22 AM Wounded King has not replied

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 56 of 301 (377805)
01-18-2007 12:58 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by AdminWounded
01-18-2007 11:41 AM


Re: Bannings
P.S. looking at the first 100 or so bans most of them that aren't holdovers from the old board system are for spamming.
in the interests of curiosity, and total fairness and openness, is this list public? if not, can it be made so?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by AdminWounded, posted 01-18-2007 11:41 AM AdminWounded has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by AdminWounded, posted 01-18-2007 1:05 PM arachnophilia has replied

AdminWounded
Inactive Member


Message 57 of 301 (377808)
01-18-2007 1:05 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by arachnophilia
01-18-2007 12:58 PM


Re: Bannings
in the interests of curiosity, and total fairness and openness, is this list public? if not, can it be made so?
Not as far as I know, I can access it through the dBOARD administration pages which are mod only. As to whether it could be made available I don't know, not in its current form I shouldn't think.
TTFN,
AW

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by arachnophilia, posted 01-18-2007 12:58 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by arachnophilia, posted 01-18-2007 1:11 PM AdminWounded has replied

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 58 of 301 (377809)
01-18-2007 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Trixie
01-18-2007 12:10 PM


Re: Where are all the creationists?
The creationists we seem to have gathered are either uneducated in the sciences
it's really, really hard to be educated and remain a creationist. panda's thumb and pharyngula posted a graph recently that shows this, statistically, but it's something we've known all along. the evidence carries evolution -- there is no scientific debate among the people that actually work with the evidence. the more exposure a person gets to the evidence (ie: the more education a person gets), the harder it becomes to remain creationist.
or are educated loonies.
definitional issue -- we call the people who are educated, yet disagree, loonies because they do not conform to traditional, rational scientific methods. well, most of them -- some of them are just clearly schizophrenic.
I think the only solution is to smile sweetly and nod your head in agreement with them, while pointedly ignoring any topic which is being derailed by them or which is being used to hurl abuse. Maybe when they realise they're being ignored because of their behaviour they will modify it. Especially if each person who chooses to ignore them posts the reason for it. How about a thread for "Who I'm ignoring and why"? Patterns would soon emerge and it would become apparent to everyone, troublemakers included, that certain behaviour isn't welcome.
won't work. as wk said, we already ignore them in showcase. but you'll notice that occasionally, a creationist will make statements about how they plan to ignore an evolutionist for such and such a reason. it's just childish, and makes things worse.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Trixie, posted 01-18-2007 12:10 PM Trixie has not replied

arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 59 of 301 (377810)
01-18-2007 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by AdminWounded
01-18-2007 1:05 PM


Re: Bannings
Not as far as I know, I can access it through the dBOARD administration pages which are mod only. As to whether it could be made available I don't know, not in its current form I shouldn't think.
copy-and-paste?
i mean, i realize there would have to be some admin discussion and general consent, but i think it would be good to publish it in the suspensions and bannings thread, say everytime we have to make a new one.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by AdminWounded, posted 01-18-2007 1:05 PM AdminWounded has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by AdminWounded, posted 01-18-2007 1:25 PM arachnophilia has replied

AdminWounded
Inactive Member


Message 60 of 301 (377813)
01-18-2007 1:25 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by arachnophilia
01-18-2007 1:11 PM


Re: Bannings
I don't fancy cutting and pasting various fields from over 300 entries into a spreadsheet myself.
There may be some more automated way of doing this, I'll mention the suggestion on the admin forums.
Originally the Suspensions and Bannings (MESSAGES BY ADMIN ONLY) thread did have the sort of format you suggested but it didn't last long, while it operated the last count was about 7 creationists to 3 evolutionists.
TTFN,
AW

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by arachnophilia, posted 01-18-2007 1:11 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by arachnophilia, posted 01-18-2007 1:35 PM AdminWounded has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024