Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Lanakila · 11-25-2004, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miss Shelby

Were you asked for a self edit first?

Michelle

No--it was deleted and I got either an official or unofficial warning. IMO the whole thread should have been closed as Carico isn't an apologetics topic, and discussing her methods and motives is not only self agrandizement but flamebait.

Crazy Liz · 11-25-2004, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seebs

Worse yet, the positions they test for are strongly correlated with a kind of militant closed-mindedness that leaves many staff at CF simply unable to comprehend that there are genuinely different positions to be held on some issues.

This indicates that voting by the present staff isn't working. QAs a result of polarization, the voting process is now stacking the deck with one party. The more imbalanced the staff becomes, the more the process will be weighted that direction.

Someone Erwin and AA respect who has a good understanding of such processes and good communications skills needs to communicate with them. The voting process needs to be changed or done away with, at least temporarily, until some balance is returned to the staff. If this doesn't happen, the CF staff will continue to become more and more extreme. At some point, the scales will tip, and CF will turn into another Rapture Ready. The liberals, moderates and reasonable people will leave.

The process of staff selection needs to be changed until the staff is brought into more of a balance, or all Erwin's investment is going to be down the drain. CF will eventually implode.

Crazy Liz · 11-25-2004, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by copernicus

The mods responded by asking me to self-edit, and I complied by removing or changing language that could be taken as the least bit offensive. I also offered to try to moderate my tone with radorth. Then I was suddenly suspended from the Apolgetics forum (until Dec. 7). I appealed through their formal appeals process, but the decision appeared to be rubber-stamped.

I was recently asked for a self-edit. the post had already been quoted in its entirety, and I had already replied to the post that quoted and responded to mine (without quoting, fortunately). After considering how I might change the tone, I realized any edit would be a no-win. I just decided to delete the whole thing, just saying "Sorry."

It worked out well. I even got away with a technical Rule 7 violation when the newbie who quoted me asked why his post had been edited by a moderator.

I think I learned something. I think maybe a self-edit is always a no-win unless you just delete the whole post.

Jet Black · 11-26-2004, 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crazy Liz

I was recently asked for a self-edit. the post had already been quoted in its entirety, and I had already replied to the post that quoted and responded to mine (without quoting, fortunately). After considering how I might change the tone, I realized any edit would be a no-win. I just decided to delete the whole thing, just saying "Sorry."

It worked out well. I even got away with a technical Rule 7 violation when the newbie who quoted me asked why his post had been edited by a moderator.

I think I learned something. I think maybe a self-edit is always a no-win unless you just delete the whole post.

it's quite possible to say exactly the same thing, but in a far more underhanded insulting way. however the humour usually gets lost.

leccy · 11-26-2004, 02:58 AM

As a slight aside I'd like to say how much I've enjoyed reading a number of threads in the CF C&E forum over the past few days, which I arrived at by virtue of having learned of the existence of CF from this forum. I didn't see a great deal of humour, but did derive a good degree of entertainment and some excellent learning from reading the threads. I haven't really delved into the mainstream threads, just the C &E forum-where I've enjoyed Jet Black's posts as well as many others. I wonder are the standards of moderation very different across the various forums there, such that a more robust degree of interaction between skeptics and Christians is more possible in some forums than others?

Most of all I was glad to see the contribution made by Theistic Evolutionists to several threads over there which did something to put the minority opinion of YEC into perspective for me. It's so rare to encounter YECs in real life over here and they are so vocal on the 'net that I'd formed the erroneous opinion lately that YEC was much more widespread in the US than it appears is the case. I'd always argued that it's perfectly possible for Bible-believing Christians to reconcile their science with their faith - I know many in real life to whom this does not seem a problem -and was very pleased to see several posters over there confirm this, with very good lines of reasoning as to how they personally achieve that. Learning how various people approach that is an important reason for visiting those forums, so thanks for pointing me in that direction.

Miss Shelby · 11-26-2004, 07:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by copernicus

Hi, folks. I just had a fairly good run at CF--lots of interesting interaction with people. Unfortunately, I got into a discussion with radorth, who reported me for perceived personal attacks against him. The mods responded by asking me to self-edit, and I complied by removing or changing language that could be taken as the least bit offensive. I also offered to try to moderate my tone with radorth. Then I was suddenly suspended from the Apolgetics forum (until Dec. 7). I appealed through their formal appeals process, but the decision appeared to be rubber-stamped.

My feeling about CF is that the moderators are more trigger-happy than biased. That's not to say that they aren't biased, but I did have a pretty long run without any interference from them. Once a moderator makes a decision, however, fellow moderators seem to simply ignore appeals. I felt so frustrated by the experience, that I told them that I was making the suspension permanent. I suspected that the future would just hold more warnings and harrassment, now that they had me pegged as a "flamer" and a "troller". I don't really have the time or patience for that kind of treatment.

Ironically, I looked up radorth's last posts in II to see how he was treated. Apparently, he appealed to the mods here to intervene on his behalf when he felt personally attacked. When he didn't get his way, he left. He finally got his attention from the CF mods, but I think that they suspended him, as well. (At least, they told me that they had.)

I left CF voluntarily and with some regret. I had made some friends over there, and I was making an honest effort not to offend them. The main attraction for me was that I got quite a few different perspectives on how people justified their religious beliefs. I even saw one reluctant deconversion take place--the flowering of a skepticism. It's a wonderful thing to behold.

I am very sorry that was your experience was such. I personally cannot stand radorth. And well, I really shouldn't say anymore than that. I probably shouldn't even have said that much.

Michelle

Miss Shelby · 11-26-2004, 07:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lanakila

No--it was deleted and I got either an official or unofficial warning. IMO the whole thread should have been closed as Carico isn't an apologetics topic, and discussing her methods and motives is not only self agrandizement but flamebait.

Did she start the thread?

Michelle

copernicus · 11-26-2004, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crazy Liz

I was recently asked for a self-edit. the post had already been quoted in its entirety, and I had already replied to the post that quoted and responded to mine (without quoting, fortunately). After considering how I might change the tone, I realized any edit would be a no-win. I just decided to delete the whole thing, just saying "Sorry."

It worked out well. I even got away with a technical Rule 7 violation when the newbie who quoted me asked why his post had been edited by a moderator.

I think I learned something. I think maybe a self-edit is always a no-win unless you just delete the whole post.

I was actually asked to self-edit radorth's comments twice. In the first case, I deleted the entire paragraph, but the thread had moved on. So I doubt that anyone noticed the deletion. In the second case, I had opined that radorth had refused to answer a question that he claimed he had answered. He took that personally, and reported it. So I changed the sentence to say that I would not pursue the matter further. However, radorth had already replied, including a full quote of the entire paragraph that he had complained about. Technically, that was a violation of their rules--to reply to a post that one has reported. So I reported this to them. Within a day, I was given a summary supension of two weeks (even though their own guidelines suggest a one-day cooling off period at first).

So, I agree with you that self-editing doesn't really work very well, especially since posts can get buried in a thread after a day or so. I think that the moderators need to try to work with perceived abusers a little more to see if they can change posting habits. My impression is that II is pretty well-moderated on that score. Sometimes threads seem to be shifted from one forum to another too quickly, but the "Elsewhere" forum is a brilliant idea. That puts pressure on people to stay on-topic, but it doesn't just cut off the thread. People seem to have to work harder here to get sanctioned, and moderators often post public warnings in the threads so that others can be aware of where the lines are drawn. At CF, the moderators act precipitously, and they seldom give public warnings. Everything is done in private, where groupthink rules the process.

PHYS251 · 11-26-2004, 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by leccy

As a slight aside I'd like to say how much I've enjoyed reading a number of threads in the CF C&E forum over the past few days, which I arrived at by virtue of having learned of the existence of CF from this forum. I didn't see a great deal of humour, but did derive a good degree of entertainment and some excellent learning from reading the threads. I haven't really delved into the mainstream threads, just the C &E forum-where I've enjoyed Jet Black's posts as well as many others. I wonder are the standards of moderation very different across the various forums there, such that a more robust degree of interaction between skeptics and Christians is more possible in some forums than others?

For a time, C&E was my comic relief forum. Any time I needed a hearty laugh, I just popped my head in there and read any thread that had at least 20-30 posts. I was usually howling by post #40. :rolling:

Quote:

Most of all I was glad to see the contribution made by Theistic Evolutionists to several threads over there which did something to put the minority opinion of YEC into perspective for me. It's so rare to encounter YECs in real life over here and they are so vocal on the 'net that I'd formed the erroneous opinion lately that YEC was much more widespread in the US than it appears is the case. I'd always argued that it's perfectly possible for Bible-believing Christians to reconcile their science with their faith - I know many in real life to whom this does not seem a problem -and was very pleased to see several posters over there confirm this, with very good lines of reasoning as to how they personally achieve that. Learning how various people approach that is an important reason for visiting those forums, so thanks for pointing me in that direction.

You're from the UK, so that would make sense. Here in the States, we have a sizeable group of people who hold onto YEC. We've had it bashed into our heads that evolution equates to godlessness, or at the very least, liberalism, and that compromise is simply not an option.

copernicus · 11-26-2004, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PHYS251 to leccy

You're from the UK, so that would make sense. Here in the States, we have a sizeable group of people who hold onto YEC. We've had it bashed into our heads that evolution equates to godlessness, or at the very least, liberalism, and that compromise is simply not an option.

I think that this depends on your experience, phys251. Not everyone in the US has been exposed to YEC fundamentalists, especially in more urban areas. The problem is not so much that the YECs are common as there is a feeling that it is "politically incorrect" to openly challenge minority viewpoints, even when they seem crazy. People bend over backwards to tolerate that kind of nonsense, and that sometimes lends it an air of legitimacy. Most christians here believe in the theory of evolution, but fundamentalists have this way of using the label "christian" to mean only their literalist brand of christianity. Add to that the fact that the news media tends to sensationalize extremist viewpoints, and you get a very distorted picture of what people really believe.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-26-2004, 02:58 AM	#95
leccy Regular Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: U.K. Posts: 368	As a slight aside I'd like to say how much I've enjoyed reading a number of threads in the CF C&E forum over the past few days, which I arrived at by virtue of having learned of the existence of CF from this forum. I didn't see a great deal of humour, but did derive a good degree of entertainment and some excellent learning from reading the threads. I haven't really delved into the mainstream threads, just the C &E forum-where I've enjoyed Jet Black's posts as well as many others. I wonder are the standards of moderation very different across the various forums there, such that a more robust degree of interaction between skeptics and Christians is more possible in some forums than others? Most of all I was glad to see the contribution made by Theistic Evolutionists to several threads over there which did something to put the minority opinion of YEC into perspective for me. It's so rare to encounter YECs in real life over here and they are so vocal on the 'net that I'd formed the erroneous opinion lately that YEC was much more widespread in the US than it appears is the case. I'd always argued that it's perfectly possible for Bible-believing Christians to reconcile their science with their faith - I know many in real life to whom this does not seem a problem -and was very pleased to see several posters over there confirm this, with very good lines of reasoning as to how they personally achieve that. Learning how various people approach that is an important reason for visiting those forums, so thanks for pointing me in that direction.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.