Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 82 (9005 total)
54 online now:
DrJones*, jar, Son Goku (3 members, 51 visitors)
Newest Member: kanthesh
Upcoming Birthdays: AdminPhat
Post Volume: Total: 881,067 Year: 12,815/23,288 Month: 540/1,527 Week: 219/207 Day: 41/39 Hour: 3/1

Announcements: Topic abandonment warning (read and/or suffer the consequences)

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Report Discussion Problems Here 3.0
Member (Idle past 2253 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009

Message 104 of 683 (593924)
11-30-2010 12:43 PM

So the best place to put this is here?
Hi Bolder-dash,

Let me try to explain more clearly this time.

This is the only thread where one can raise issues concerning discussion. If you are experiencing problems in a discussion, then this is the place to bring it to the attention of moderators.

But moderation itself is not a topic for discussion. If you wish to discuss your issues with the style of moderation here at EvC Forum then you will have to discuss them at some other bulletin board.


Ok, well if you say so:

I would contend that you do a very poor job of moderator, but the fact is I don't think you have any intention of moderating, that is not your goal, so in regards to your objective, you do a very thorough job. I don't think the goal of this site is to foster interesting discussion, I think it is simply for you to evangelize your viewpoint and hamstring all others. That is what I wished to discuss-so I guess here is the place for that:


I propose a discussion about my theory that there is an utter lack of desire by the sites administrator to actually administer a scientific forum. What I believe is that instead the site simply wishes to be a evolutionist propaganda generating machine, so so many of the other atheistically inspired campaigns in science and media, that wants to monopolize the debate, stifle the scientific argument, control the messages, and create an echo chamber that has the vague 'appearance' of conducting an intellectual discussion simply for the purposes of masking their propaganda like any good marketing con that wants to convince people or sell something. That is my thesis.

Evidence for this thesis lies in varying forms of veiled censorship, false advertising, and outrageous moderation that would have make any banana dictator proud.

Percy, (the fucking pussy in my opinion , frankly) tries to make people believe that he is interested in encouraging scientific dialogue and interesting thought, when in fact (as he as even explicitly stated in the 'Phil Plait Don't be a Dick thread) his only real motivation in any of these discussion is to come up with the "best strategy for convincing the fence sitters" of the validity of his own evolutionist beliefs. When someone is clearly in the game of trying to force others to believe what they believe, rational discussion and the search for the truth gets thrown out the window-and that is clearly reflected in the administration of this website.

We are constantly being told that it is in the best interest of all that wish to be involved in intelligent conversation that 'off topic" comments be limited by the moderators. This is in fact simply a pretext for Percy latest efforts to jump into any discussion anytime his theory looks under threat of being questioned (because once again, we know by his own words that his goal is to convince as many fence sitters as possible, NOT to engage in lively debate or to expand ones knowledge, thinking or viewpoint on a subject). If in fact it were simply a matter of Percy wishing to keep the debates more focused, for one we would see a much more even application of his interruptions and accusations of off topic remarks to both evolutionists and to opposing viewpoints, but the evidence clearly shows this is not the case (which we can get into further).

As of late Percy has permanently banned Faith, has given warnings to Dawn, has suspended marc9000, has banned me for a month for something even he can't come up with a valid rationale for, is threatening ICANT, and has now thrown out this beauty to Kaichos Man:

"Why ever in the world would anyone want to begin an extended discussion with you when your history says you abruptly abandon discussions and only participate for at most a couple weeks at a time, the only exception being right after you first joined. The last time I discussed Haldane's Dilemma with you over at the TOE and the Reasons for Doubt thread you ignored my last two responses and then disappeared a short while later. You're raising this concern about Haldane's Dilemma as if it were something we were hiding from, but the fact of the matter is that the last time you brought it up we discussed it with you forthrightly, but you began ignoring responses and then we didn't hear from you again.

So no thanks. I'll invest my time with people who actually finish what they begin."

Well, Why in the world would Kaichos Man abandon a discussion with you Percy? Perhaps because its not a discussion! You have no intention of having a discussion. It's you telling people what they can and can't say and trying to make it look good for the 'fence sitters"! You asshole.

So how can we determine conclusively if this really is a board which encourages lively debate (heck not everything in a discussion is even a debate Percy, you know, some people are not interested in convincing others of their viewpoint, unlike you, they may actually wish to just talk about things, which is what some unsuspecting visitors might think this place was designed for!).?

One way would be to see just how far Percy is willing to let people who don't agree with him speak. The more he tries to censor those voices, and argue with them 18 times over every new thread proposal they make that doesn't echo his party line, the more evidence we have for the bullshit intentions of this forum. In fact this entire premise that allowing ''off topic" remarks to continue would destroy his whole forum is a complete canard. There can be valid reason for attempting to keep a level of civil discourse in discussions (something which Percy uses virtually no time trying to monitor, especially when it is directed at his "enemies") , but this whole notion that nothing intelligent can come of letting some conversations go on tangents is again pure bullshit. If its interesting, and scientific, or even just thought provoking, a good moderator would simply let the ideas flow. If the purpose of the site was to actually have an intelligent discussion-which again the evidence will show it clearly its not.
So what say you, is this site really about seeking the truth, about inspiring thought, about letting ideas flow, or is it about feeding Percy's goal to have all his fence sitters watch a carefully controlled propaganda machine spin his little schemes while allowing just enough input from a few mild opposing viewpoints to give the (false) impression of an even exchange of ideas. Has the site flourished under Percy's guidance with a wide range of regular contributors who can jump into any discussion and have a go, or has it been squeezed almost dry of anything interesting and lively by Percy's constant interference. Are there more and more interesting and opposing viewpoints coming here to discuss things, or is the side becoming more one sided than ever-a dull repeating of the same evolutionary talking points with no one allowed to effectively challenge any of them, by virtue of the sites moderation monopoly. I think we can all see what has happened to this site over the past year or so (are there any people even left for them to pretend to debate with?), especially recently, to answer that one pretty quickly.

Lets just say Percy wouldn't be the first among the so called scientific evolutionary camp to try and control the message through any means necessary, but he certainly is one of the most sleazy and unethical that I have seen.

So that's my theory. I would suggest Coffee House or Peanut Gallery as the appropriate forums for this thread so we can have as little moderation interruption as possible.


I believe you actually do have an interest in science. Unfortunately I don't feel you are honest enough to just leave it at that. Getting others to believe your worldview is more important to you than any science or intellectual integrity.

Edited by Admin, : Hide content, comments coming...

Edited by Admin, : Add comments.

Member (Idle past 2253 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009

Message 159 of 683 (602840)
02-01-2011 4:02 AM

percy's late of action
What I know is that you seem to have a blind spot for your own snark, and that despite the many times I have advised you to refrain from responding in kind so that a moderator can take action that you never do that.

If you focus on the topic and follow the Forum Guidelines then the moderators will be on your side. Moderators don't care about the position, they care about whether a participant is contributing or hindering discussion, and the Forum Guidelines are our guide in this respect. One of our moderators, slevesque, is a creationist. I've CC'd him. The relevant message is Message 711, you'll have to click on "peek" to see the content, the prior message is Message 703.
-- Percy
EvC Forum Director

Percy, I gave you a list of more than 10 posts in one thread alone, including these gems, of which you have taken absolutely no action:

Dr. A to

"The fact that someone more knowledgeable than you finds your gibberish downright embarrassing to read ... supports your position?

Perhaps you could explain why. Or perhaps you could post more gibberish. Only time will tell, although I believe that I can guess. "

and this:

"You are, of course, wrong. (that was his entire post!)

and this:

"So you are unable or unwilling to produce any argument that might even appear to support your gibberish.

Yeah, well, you are a creationist. "


"The prediction that any attempt to defend creationism will be ignorant, stupid, dishonest, or all three simultaneously is once again confirmed. " (Again his entire post! This is contributing to the discussion????)

and finally this:

"No, apparently there is a third option. You could gibber out dishonest equivocations on the word "random", and we could laugh at you.

You silly little man. " (once again, this is all he had to add to the forum! unbelievable!)

Cavediver wrote:

"I'm sorry, but even if he does explain himself, Shapiro is still an idiot for using the term "non-random" in this context. But then, BD has made it quite clear that he only wants to use idiot-speak, so probably best if you don't mention big words like "distribution" and "probability" as they will only upset him.

Theodoric wrote:

"To Shadow, Bolder and their ilk it is not important want Shapiro meant. What matters is how the can manipulate the language of what he said to meet their needs. Honesty and integrity means nothing."

Now are you telling me that all of these posts are an acceptable standard to use of this forum? Are they content worthy, on topic and respectful?

Because you sure as heck have not taken any action whatsoever for these posts, so one can only assume that this is acceptable?

And then you send a private message to me, saying that the problem is all mine?

So give a straight answer this time instead of always trying to direct the blame to me. Are these other posts acceptable or not? YES or NO?

Did you take any action at all regarding any of these posts? So I can use their standard in the future since you have not repudiated these posts?

Claiming your moderation is applied equally doesn't make it so Percy. Does it get any more obvious than this?

Edited by Bolder-dash, : No reason given.

Edited by Bolder-dash, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by Admin, posted 02-01-2011 8:53 AM Bolder-dash has not yet responded
 Message 164 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-10-2011 7:27 AM Bolder-dash has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 2253 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009

Message 395 of 683 (634398)
09-21-2011 9:33 AM

percy completely out of line.
Someone needs to remind him that this is supposed to be a debate site. If someone uses the defense, as WK did in the "Wright et al. on the Process of Mutation" that the "modern synthesis" takes all of the Shapiros new found discoveries into account, he should be expected to explain that. It is completely ON TOPIC and appropriate to address his point that he has not made a clear explanation of what this means.

Since Percy has shown over and over again that he is completely incapable of moderating such discussions fairly, and since he simply wants to hold a grudge because I disagree with his point of view, shouldn't a more fair moderator be used to decide what is and isn't on topic? Why did you bring in a so called 'creationist" moderator in Chuck77 if Percy is still going to continue to just barricade the doors for any discussions that challenge the prevailing point of view on EVC?

How can anyone be expected to have a discussion about evolution, if pro-evolutionists are allowed to throw out any term they want, without the responsibility of defining those terms. One side is allowed to say anything they want, but the other side can never challenge it.

As soon as I start a new topic to discuss the issue, Percy will also decide what he thinks can be discussed in that topic as well, and it becomes a never ending game of Percy trying to control who is winning any debate. If Dr. A cries that something is off topic because it is too difficult to answer, Percy will come running with his diapers to help him. Its disgusting.

Edited by Bolder-dash, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 396 by Son, posted 09-21-2011 10:27 AM Bolder-dash has responded
 Message 399 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-21-2011 11:43 AM Bolder-dash has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 2253 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009

Message 397 of 683 (634409)
09-21-2011 10:56 AM
Reply to: Message 396 by Son
09-21-2011 10:27 AM

Re: percy completely out of line.
Actually, I was going to post a link, but then I thought Percy would probably suspend me claiming that my link was off topic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 396 by Son, posted 09-21-2011 10:27 AM Son has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 398 by Admin, posted 09-21-2011 11:13 AM Bolder-dash has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 2253 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009

Message 580 of 683 (666365)
06-26-2012 1:07 PM

Pandas with rabies
If this doesn't merit a suspension, then virtually nothing does:


EvC Forum ⇒ Science Forums ⇒ Big Bang and Cosmology ⇒ Creation cosmology and the Big Bang

Message 227 of 232 (666354)
06-26-2012 11:53 PM

Member (Idle past 2253 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009

Message 581 of 683 (666385)
06-26-2012 2:29 PM

So an evolutionist who posts for the sole purpose of calling someone a babbling ***** gets one a 24 hour suspension, but a creationist supposedly being off topic on a science post gets a one month, or else a permanent ban from posting in certain topics?

Any wonder where so few creationists bother here?

Replies to this message:
 Message 582 by New Cat's Eye, posted 06-26-2012 2:32 PM Bolder-dash has not yet responded
 Message 583 by AdminModulous, posted 06-26-2012 3:13 PM Bolder-dash has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 2253 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009

Message 627 of 683 (668771)
07-24-2012 11:01 AM


I see a message that I can't respond to a biological forum post. At least when you have blackballed me from commenting in forums, you should make it a public record and explain why, don't you think?

I means since you always brag about how fair it is here.

Replies to this message:
 Message 628 by Panda, posted 07-24-2012 12:14 PM Bolder-dash has not yet responded
 Message 629 by Admin, posted 07-24-2012 1:01 PM Bolder-dash has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020