Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 88 (8929 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-24-2019 9:15 PM
23 online now:
AZPaul3, DrJones*, JonF, Theodoric (4 members, 19 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jedothek
Post Volume:
Total: 860,376 Year: 15,412/19,786 Month: 2,135/3,058 Week: 509/404 Day: 24/89 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
2Next
Author Topic:   Report Discussion Problems Here 4.0
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15329
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 36 of 707 (681294)
11-24-2012 11:23 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by crashfrog
11-24-2012 11:13 AM


Re: Moderator attention in that thread
From my point of view the problem we had was that your argument ("Jesus wasn't called Jesus Christ therefore he didn't exist") was batshit raving crazy and no sane person could possibly accept it. Any idea that I disagreed with it because you were making it is equally divorced from reality.

So I guess you need to improve your own evaluation of what is going wrong.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 11:13 AM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 11:25 AM PaulK has responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15329
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 39 of 707 (681297)
11-24-2012 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by crashfrog
11-24-2012 11:25 AM


Re: Moderator attention in that thread
Well, Crash at the very least you made the argument that it was somehow significant to the idea of Jesus not existing. And that IS batshit crazy.

e.g.

Message 165


When "historical Jesus" proponents actually get around to describing who Jesus Christ actually was, they invariably produce an individual who wasn't named either Jesus or Christ. And the reason I say "wasn't executed by Romans" is because he doesn't seem to have been executed by Romans...

or Message 223


Well, no. We have an utterly implausible story of a "historical Jesus Christ" who wasn't named Jesus Christ, didn't do miracles, may not have been a carpenter, never gave the Sermon on the Mount, didn't magnify the fishes and loaves, wasn't executed by the Romans, and didn't rise from his grave three days later.

And I hope I don't need to go into the silliness of your "doesn't seem to have been executed by Romans" argument.

Transliterations and translations are inevitable when you take words from one language to another with a different script. You HAVE to do one or the other. To assign any special significance to them is just silly.

Edited by Admin, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 11:25 AM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 12:11 PM PaulK has responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15329
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 41 of 707 (681299)
11-24-2012 12:22 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by crashfrog
11-24-2012 12:11 PM


Re: Moderator attention in that thread
quote:

Right, and that was the argument that I was making - when you assert, as the source of a series of stories about a mythological figure a historical figure who bears no significant similarity to the mythological one, it's insufficient to simply say that the historical figure is the source of the mythological one.

Thank you for confirming my point. Because listing a similarity as a lack of similarity makes no sense whatever.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 12:11 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 12:36 PM PaulK has responded
 Message 43 by AdminModulous, posted 11-24-2012 12:55 PM PaulK has not yet responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15329
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 45 of 707 (681311)
11-24-2012 1:22 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by crashfrog
11-24-2012 12:36 PM


Re: Moderator attention in that thread
While I'm sympathetic to the idea of starting a new thread for a full discussion I really don't see the need to do so for an obvious and trivial point.

Names and titles derived through transliteration and/pr translation should be counted as at least similar to the originals (usually they'd be accepted as the same, unless there was an error). And that's because one or the other HAS to be done when going from one language - such as Hebrew - to another - like Greek - with a different alphabet.

So if we are dealing with something that is the result of transliteration and/or translation it should count as a similarity. So why list this similarity as a lack of similarity ?

Edited by AdminModulous, : off topic hidden


This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 12:36 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 1:33 PM PaulK has responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15329
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


(1)
Message 47 of 707 (681314)
11-24-2012 1:52 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by crashfrog
11-24-2012 1:33 PM


Re: Moderator attention in that thread
Clearly rational discussion with you on this point is impossible. You think that similar things aren't similar, you think that insignificant differences must be taken as significant. And much, much more.

But thanks for proving my point about where the problem is. It's not me - it's you.

Edited by AdminModulous, : off topic hidden


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 1:33 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 2:07 PM PaulK has not yet responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15329
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 60 of 707 (681831)
11-28-2012 6:40 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by Huntard
11-28-2012 6:39 AM


Re: Forever having another meltdown?
RPG.net has the concept of a "thread ban". Maybe the moderators here should be using it.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Huntard, posted 11-28-2012 6:39 AM Huntard has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Admin, posted 11-28-2012 8:51 AM PaulK has responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15329
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 62 of 707 (681840)
11-28-2012 8:52 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by Admin
11-28-2012 8:51 AM


Re: Forever having another meltdown?
It's not software controlled at RPG.net either. A moderator just tells the participant to leave the thread. With further sanctions if they don't.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Admin, posted 11-28-2012 8:51 AM Admin has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by AdminModulous, posted 11-28-2012 10:57 AM PaulK has not yet responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15329
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 167 of 707 (699899)
05-28-2013 4:55 AM


Will no one rid us of this turbulent spammer?
Example sandiegoaccidentlawcenter.com | San Diego-Vista-Chula Vista | Auto Accident
    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15329
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 222 of 707 (725526)
04-28-2014 2:03 AM


More evidence that Ed is a troll
Message 56
    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15329
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 227 of 707 (735392)
08-13-2014 9:44 AM


I'm a bit suspicious of this
Message 197

A guy who registered in November last year, suddenly decides to post a provocative - but low-content - message in a thread last active in December last year ?


Replies to this message:
 Message 228 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-13-2014 3:19 PM PaulK has responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15329
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 229 of 707 (735402)
08-13-2014 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 228 by Dr Adequate
08-13-2014 3:19 PM


Re: I'm a bit suspicious of this
I suspect that maybe a "friend" is using his account to try to troll the board.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-13-2014 3:19 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15329
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 240 of 707 (739042)
10-19-2014 6:01 PM


Russian Spam
Message 1

And yes it is Spam.


    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15329
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 241 of 707 (739755)
10-27-2014 3:48 PM


Pirate Movie spam (or worse)
Message 1 And I have more sense to click on those links. Don't you do it either. You might find that you get something you didn't want.
Replies to this message:
 Message 242 by Admin, posted 10-27-2014 6:26 PM PaulK has not yet responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15329
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 395 of 707 (768066)
09-05-2015 2:49 PM
Reply to: Message 392 by Admin
09-05-2015 9:43 AM


Re: forum rules
What's even stranger is that the idea Marc (incorrectly) complains of is very like his preferred method of dealing with First Amendment violations.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 392 by Admin, posted 09-05-2015 9:43 AM Admin has acknowledged this reply

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15329
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


(6)
Message 412 of 707 (770928)
10-16-2015 1:37 AM


Disgusted by Faith's vile tactics
I wish to particularly complain about her posts in this thread which are a nasty and thoroughly dishonest slap in the face to everyone who dared to attempt honest discussion with her.

Personal conviction that the objections are no good is no substitute for real answers to them. And that is all Faith has. That, and the lie that she has already answered them.
That's no reason to shut down discussion as Faith has attempted. It is bullying, pure and simple.

And then to go whining and lying to the moderators because her bullying didn't work, because people dared to hit back, to claim that she was the victim. That's just disgusting.

Faith says she wants people to think about her argument - but she doesn't. The objections to her argument are the product of thinking - really thinking - about her argument. And yet she demands that the objections be discarded without thought, just on her say so.

What Faith demands is unthinking agreement. Which is death to discussion - the purpose of this site. And she dares complain that the moderators oppose her ? Ridiculous.

Edited by Admin, : Fix typos.


    
1
2Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019