General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures (aka 'The Whine List')

Your story keeps changing and your excuses keep getting thinner and thinner. Now you insult me by calling me a whiner.In Truth you've given up trying to rationalize your behavior and now you're just throwing me to the trolls in the hope that I will get angry and say something bitter that you can then use as an excuse to give me banned. Good luck with that.By the way this is exactly the result that I expected all along.Edited by granpa, : No reason given.Edited by granpa, : No reason given.

The whole point of the proposed threads forum is so you can point out any issues you might have with that post before it gets sent to regular discussion. If you had any issues with my post you should have simply pointed them out and giving me a chance to rectify it. The fact that you didn't do so clearly reveals your true motivesEdited by granpa, : No reason given.

And your habit of proposing, let us kindly say "questionable" topics, cut-and-pasted from elsewhere, then not staying around to defend them, reeks of spam. Only the proposer and admins can post to the Proposed Topic threads.Edited by Coyote, : No reason given.

"The whole point of the proposed threads forum is so you can point out any issues you might have with that post before it gets sent to regular discussion."Only the moderator is allowed to respond to thread proposals in that forum.

Hey Percy, 1. Actually you previously and similarly admonished me about using examples of western crimes against third world nations. Seems to be a repeating irritant to you.2. One of the forum rules is to argue the topic, not the person: That type of post may not foment respectful responses. It would be helpful if you model the type of behavior you want others to copy.3. The topic has veered off-topic to A valid reason to vote 3rd Party before I posted anything. You yourself have participated in this off-topic discussion for several dozen posts.4. I’ve opened many new threads in the past, but thanks for the reminder. Good advice for EVERYbody.5. a. Precedent: I’ve been posting these type of photos, that ARE supportive evidence, for a long time on the forum (years?). Curiously, you only started to object when I was specifically debating you.b. Spamming?

quote:

---

spamming is the use of electronic messaging systems to send an unsolicited message (spam), especially advertising, as well as sending messages repeatedly on the same site. Spamming - Wikipedia

---

It doesn’t seem my inclusion of photos or cartoons that support my argument can be called ‘spamming.’ The photos were not advertisements, and each of my posts included new material, as opposed to some variation of please take your medications. Per the forum’s guidelines we are encouraged to provide evidence for our arguments. Perhaps you are against me presenting TOO much evidence? That would be a strange request in a a debate forum, but perhaps the forum has some technical limitation that I am not aware. If not, then I’m confused. It seems you have a personal definition of ‘spamming’ that I am not familiar with, please provide. Be specific or else I risk running against the forum’s whims again.6. a. Repeatedly posting I think you're still forgetting to take your meds may not help create a respectful environment for a ‘decent place. It would be helpful if you model the type of behavior you want others to copy.b. And since the topics are often about the ugliness of the world, life’s crudity, grown-up debates, etc., . . . then, without arbitrary censorship, how will you maintain the forum to be a decent place AND still discuss the world’s adult matters? If possible, please be specific.7. You originally wrote that you would be DELETING portions of my posts. Thank you for seeing that the photos are not mere Spam, whatever that term may now mean, and that they do indeed have value, and thank you for self-correcting your action. We both agree that credible charges of censorship would devalue the forum.8. Lastly, just a gentle reminder, . . . you do know it is bad form to be both participant and moderator in the same thread, especially while in the middle of a debate. Asking a co-moderator to assist would seem to be a more even-handed action.Thank you for your time.Edited by dronestar, : clarity

I said I would follow standard administrative procedures. For me as a participant to become a moderator entails recusing myself from discussion in the thread for two days before taking over moderation. Obviously one person can't read everything posted to the forum, and this is the first time I've seen a post from you with such photos. Please stop. Topic diversions are not discouraged unless they interfere with the main topic. Well, then, if both of us behave respectfully and work toward making this a decent place then there shouldn't be any problem, should there.

I've just realized that the other evcforum.net poster you are reminding me of is Dennis Markuze - That's not a good thing.But feel free to start a new "Coffee House" topic to air your Hillary perspective.Adminnemooseusps - For the record, Dennis's most recent postings were via the superuniverse ID.

When discussing a book that begins with the whole of the very second paragraph consisting of nothing but unsupported assertions it is reasonable to ask "What is the evidence to support all those assertions."Is AdminPhat really that ignorant?

All I am doing is standing up for Faith for a change. Granted she never acknowledges your numerous (many, many) posts where you ask her for evidence...but the fact is that she does not feel a need to do so. She has her belief and asks only that people respect it...no matter how lacking in evidence it might be. This may be the dogma of her culture, but it deserves more than pity and ridicule.

quote:

---

The sincerely held beliefs of other members deserve your respect. Please keep discussion civil. Argue the position, not the person.

---

I think that Faith’s idea of respect is rather different from the intent of the guidelines. Moreover it is apparently not something she is willing to extend to others, despite her claim it is owedSince Faith is apparently unwilling to explain what she means, perhaps you can explain and justify the respect that you think should be given - and make sure that Faith is held to the standard, too. Because we know perfectly well that she won’t follow it of her own accord.

Sorry but not all beliefs deserve respect. Granted beliefs that harm no one other than the believer should be tolerated but not necessarily respected.This is a discussion board.Faith started a topic to discuss the book.She has shown she is unwilling or unable to provide evidence to support her beliefs.So just how can we discuss the book?We have acknowledge that it is very likely there are lots of people that believe much like she believes.Edited by jar, : add last sentence

I can respect people who collect stamps but if they come on a discussion board and make claims about their stamp collection, they can expect to be challenged.

Criticize the book and its author rather than Faith herself. We all know each other by now and we know that she will never play your game of evidence nor challenge orthodox interpretations. Better to move the topic forward by challenging the author and providing counter-arguments rather than expect Faith to have to question her own beliefs. It will never happen.

Asking her to provide evidence, pointing out that she cannot or will not support her assertions is not criticizing her but rather commenting on the fact that the book is simply another example of cult dogma.The author is afraid to join in the discussion it seems.Edited by jar, : add the fact that the author is not a part of the discussion and so cannot be challenged.

Approaching a discussion that way is simply your attempt to frame the issue the way that you feel it needs to be framed before the public. In her mind, it is disrespectful. It does not allow her an alternative stage to present the issue the way that she feels needs to be presented to the public (or at least those who share her views). The author never has a pleasant discussion with you, though. She is continually asked to answer your questions, provide evidence, or feels as if she is losing a debate that she never wanted. Granted this is a discussion board. And yes, you were taught to defend your views years ago and seem to respect that mode of debate. All she wants is another stage next to the one she sees as liberal and leftist. She wants a stage on the right.