Report Discussion Problems Here 4.0

Keep the comments brief. Suggestions and Questions are ok, but try and avoid Discussions. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Add "(NOT A DISCUSSION TOPIC!!!)" to topic title.Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Change previous edit to be in red.Edited by Admin, : Shorten title - I'm testing the theory that the admonition in the title that this is not a discussion topic is leading people to mistakenly conclude they shouldn't post here.

I cant seem to get in.....

isles or aisles?

Can you show me specific examples of dadman being off topic?In each post that was made in that topic, hooah was off topic and had no apologies. New creationists should be given leeway and time to defend their apologetic s. Hooah knows better and was simply spamming the topic out of disrespect.add by edit: Suspension lifted early. Dadman is proving to be more of a troll than I thought. Lets all lead by example though....Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

I now see that you were right, but I am a creationist moderator and will give new creationists/fundamentalists leeway up to a point.The fact remains that hooah knows better...apparantly dadman does not. Hooahs suspension is lifted anyway...I can learn a few things from all of this as well...

I wanted to ask you if deleting some of these spam threads is appropriate? I began moving them to the "spam threads" forum and realized they were numerous (and likely computer generated)

We are aware of his violations, but being a new member we are giving him an opportunity to explain himself. The forum is about Evolution vs Creationism.A Creationist must be given the opportunity to explain how and why they believe what they do and how they understand concepts such as facts vs fantasy, belief versus evidence, and whether they believe that God can coexist with Science.Edited by Phat, : articulation

I understand our rules. Im just giving him some rope. He can either choose to lasso the moon or hang himself. If we never gave any creationist a chance to scientifically prove creationism, we would have nothing here but evolutionists.Give him a couple of days at least.
Add by edit: We also have the option to insist he talk about science in a belief forum. Would that help keep our science forums pure?Edited by Phat, : having tea with the queen

I would think that it fits nicely in my current thread. After all, it does pertain to Christian marketing.

I see your point. Lighten up, people...share some wine and dismiss the whine! I admit that it is frustrating when people occasionally ignore my challenges...I am here to entertain myself as much as anybody. We all need to be taken seriously at least some of the time....Sounds like a family argument to me.

She does have a point. You keep challenging her to address you in your thread and you often insult her personally by asking her if she has ever read the bible and does she know what evidence is....etc...sometimes you get a bit carried away.Look at what you said here: You may have won the argument at the expense of belittling your opponent. Not consistent with our Forum Guidelines.In my opinion, what she thinks is a sacred right of free speech. She can put her own foot in her mouth at times, but you certainly don't need to belittle her intelligence. This is not a high school argument on the front porch late at night where no prisoners are taken. Faith is the epitome of the creationist side. Without her there would be precious few debates even occurring here.Thats my 2 cents. Edited by Phat, : addedEdited by Phat, : No reason given.

I'll take your side here against jar, but I notice that you are being a bit aggressive towards edge. We all get a bit carried away at times...myself included.

I disagree. In a forum conversation, there are differing points of view and interpretations of data. If a person is ignorant of the lie, and if the lie can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be a factual falsehood, this still gives no one the right to brand an individual as a lier.

Perhaps my objection could have been better written, but my position is essentially the same as caffeine. here. If there is to be a debate at all, the evolutionist side cannot simply claim that they have defined the rules according to reality and thus frame the debate in the context of truth vs lies. It is fair game to attack the so-called lies themselves without connecting them to the creationist. My position is that no side has a right to reality in this discussion. Reality is suspended for the purpose of reasoned argumentation.

The point is that you have no right to claim the default position