My sincere apologies to Percy, Moose, and defenderofthefaith. I have been so
out of it in forum activity these last few weeks that I missed your posts on moderation proceedures and so forth. The last I saw way back when was your Message 34 in this thread, Percy, and by that I assumed it was ok to go ahead and post elsewhere. Then when I saw your statement, Moose, elsewhere to the effect that you approved of my posting outside of Freeforall, I began to check back and found these other posts.
As you can see, my time here is too limited, I'm afraid to even find time to read much, outside of what I acturally respond to. I don't think I would be of much help in that regard.
Defenderofthe faith, I believe you asked me to comment on what aspects of moderation I am troubled with. I think moderation here is very good for the most part, so there's likely not enough complaint by me to warrant a thread. My problem, I believe is the consensus of Syamsu and what I've read of some others, whom I don't specifically recall; that moderation is biased in favor of evos. I don't think this is intentional, and consequently not recognized by the administration, whose mindset is naturalistic. This mindset is
naturally uninclined to recognize supernatural events as possible because they do by definition, overstep scientific fundamentals which Administration seems to insist on being continually relevant to sensible discussion in the science topics.
Then too, since most of the few creationists who find the time to be here are not scientists, and with the exception of a few, are unable to articulate much of the
language of the physicist minded folk here in town. I'm glad to see Syamsu is back posting again, as he's one of those who can articulate quite well here, from what I've read of him. Consequently, when we do venture into some of these technical topics, we find ourselves having to resort much to links of those who are apprised in science and physics. I think the moderation of these situations should be more tolerant of this situation, as well as something John Paul alluded to, and that will be my third comment.
Being the minority, we have more posts of our majority view counterparts. It is nice to have all that response, for the most part, but unless we spend a lot of time, it is really difficult to be really fair with all our counterparts and respond to each argument. In the Freeforall, we are able to pick and choose, as time warrants as to which posts we deem worthy of our time and can participate without being reminded of rules, unless it gets so out of hand that moderation is needed anyhow. O course, I found that being restricted to Freeforall isn't too neat either, as it would mess up the whole forum if main topics become too prevalent on Freeforall. I understand that problem more, having been
tenyeared for a spell there.
Off the cuff, I'd be inclined to think Defenderofthefaith would be fine at a try for moderator. Admittedly though, I haven't read enough to be very objective on that though, and would not be surprised if Administration would want to observe input by anyone for a period of time before installing moderators.
Thanks Percy and Moose, for being fair and understanding with me. I'll try to
keep the peace and participate in an acceptable manner, keeping those basic rules in mind. buz
[This message has been edited by buzsaw, 09-15-2003]