Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8937 total)
20 online now:
dwise1, Theodoric (2 members, 18 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: ssope
Happy Birthday: AdminPhat
Post Volume: Total: 861,822 Year: 16,858/19,786 Month: 983/2,598 Week: 229/251 Day: 58/59 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures (aka 'The Whine List')
Modulous
Member (Idle past 362 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 284 of 1043 (634768)
09-23-2011 8:59 PM
Reply to: Message 281 by RAZD
09-23-2011 7:36 PM


Re: Does "stalking" accomplish anything related to the topics?
Frankly that Mod engages in this petty kind of behavior is somewhat shocking to me.

I wasn't intending to 'stalk'. I thought it was fun. I hoped the would help indicate I wasn't being spiteful in some way.

This post has nothing to do with the topic or the post it is purportedly a reply to.

I disagree. I was musing that the guy in the comic was wagering on a negative hypothesis for which he had no evidence with regards in specifics to the potential FTL neutrino news. It was about the comic that you posted.

It engages in misrepresentations (the perpetuation of falsehoods, not dissimilar to Gish Gallops) and attempts to beg for answers that would not be appropriate to the topic/s.

I didn't realize I was misrepresenting anything or anyone, or that I was saying anything all that contentious. My apologies. My understanding of pseudoskeptics was that when a result comes up that suggests psychic powers, they write off the result with a negative theory for which they have no evidence.

quote:
Truzzi considered most skeptics to be pseudoskeptics, a term he coined to describe those who assume an occult or paranormal claim is false without bothering to investigate it.

That seemed to be what the guy in the comic was doing with a physics result rather than a psychic result. Again, apologies if you felt I was harassing you for answers or trying to drag you into an irrelevant debate.

Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by RAZD, posted 09-23-2011 7:36 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 285 by RAZD, posted 09-23-2011 9:17 PM Modulous has acknowledged this reply

  
Modulous
Member (Idle past 362 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 580 of 1043 (667445)
07-07-2012 5:21 PM


Clarification please, Percy
I think clarification is needed on recent moderator actions. Phat moved Unpaid Work For The Unemployed to Free For All in Message 236. I would have thought this meant we were largely free to behave like uncivil animals at one another within legal limits.

However Percy has posted a moderator request to stop talking about 'perceived problems' in Message 241. I think there's a fair probability that crashfrog will want to respond to the lies he believes I am telling in my posts to him, so it would be wise to get that matter clarified before he starts writing his response out.

So which wins out, Percy's request or the Free For All philosophy?

Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 581 by Admin, posted 07-08-2012 7:26 AM Modulous has responded

  
Modulous
Member (Idle past 362 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 582 of 1043 (667489)
07-08-2012 8:47 AM
Reply to: Message 581 by Admin
07-08-2012 7:26 AM


Re: Clarification please, Percy
I'm happy to avoid moderation while the discussion remains legal, which I anticipate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 581 by Admin, posted 07-08-2012 7:26 AM Admin has acknowledged this reply

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019