As the replacement Moderation page has developed the old bug so that permalinks no longer navigate to the appropriate comment, so here is yet another page for continuing discussion on moderating issues. The Rules can be found there so anyone with an issue should check that they are familiar with them.
The Skeptical Zone
"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be mistaken."
Oh, goodness, betrayed by fellow IDists! 😉 So sad. 🙁 Maybe that’s why he’s recently come after me whining of unfair treatment. LOL!
ISCID is now defunct. Is ARN still an active forum? Otherwise, where else would stcordova have to go peddling his creationist crack? I doubt PT or Sandwalk or AtBC would welcome his YECist/IDist protesting ideologies.
Alan Fox,
The temptation to respond “Suck it, Alan” is high, but I still hope to invite you for a
glassbottle of wine the next time I’m in your neck of the woods.Erik,
I like the new verb and it seems appropriate based on that thread. How would you define ‘patricking’?
I have no idea what your position is regarding the validity of aspects of Biblical flood mythology.
People in glass houses, Gregory. Where are you still welcome around the blogosphere?
Good. We have one vote. Keep them coming.
Gregory,
“Kicking ass and taking names” will do for something a sociologist is capable of understanding.
(that was quoted as a letter from BA).
Thanks for posting, Sal. That almost needs a topic of its own.
There’s no better place to explore the art of the vigneron!
Erik,
There’s lots of creationist sites, Alan. Didn’t you know that?
And there are atheist sites where you might feel comfortably numb too 😉
But where is IDism discussed across a range of positions other than here? Do tell.
Oh, you make my day, Patrick.
Don’t we have a heart emoji around here? Oh, yeah
♥ ♥
Neil Rickert,
In a rare case, we agree. Let Sal vent his banishment from UD on his own personal thread here at TAMSZ!
(Sadly though, now that I’ve suggested it, he won’t.)
God Empress?
+1. Especially given all the ‘ID is winning’ propaganda they post.
Barry thinks that freethinkers, agnostics, skeptics, and atheists are like Nazis. Gregory thinks that we are the scum of the earth — a level of approbation I myself would hold in reserve for pedophiles.
To be held in such lofty contempt by gentlemen of such intellectual and moral stature as Barry and Gregory is a badge of honor I am proud to wear.
As you know, I think you should remove it and replace it with something like Alan Fox’s “mom rule”.
Looks like I am going to have to increase my $ donations to UD!
Bravo!
As discussed ad nauseam, you have been non-responsive.
I fully recognize that Erik is conducing a lame-ass sociology experiment with his call to vote.
While we’re on the topic of lame-ass sociology, I did particularly enjoy Gregory’s High School mistake re Voltaire.
🙂
Well, I’ve heard of AIG and imagine there are others.
I doubt that. Atheism is something I grew up with. I don’t need a support group.
UD is about the only place left where any discussion takes place purportedly to be about ID, although the current owner has recently disclosed that no longer to be its primary purpose.
Which other sites do you frequent these days? I did look in at BioLogos but it seems very quiet at the moment.
Cracked me up.
You’re quite good at remembering Lizzie’s post on this matter, apparently, but mine, in which I paraphrased Patrick’s questions in a manner that he OK’d and to which you responded with your refusal to answer (a response I congratulated you for, incidentally) has somehow completely escaped your memory.
Hunh.
sexist 🙂
Obviously KN is confused as usual in his philosophistry. To compare me with Barry is hilarious, and desperate. It shows how unrealistic KN’s ‘interpretations’ are, based on his empiricist, naturalist, anti-theist ideologies.
It’s a unique tactic of escalating hostility in discussion, very difficult to follow through by someone who is not Patrick. First, isolate a phrase in the interlocutor’s post and ignore the rest of the post. Second, ask clarification for that phrase. Third, accept only clarification that further isolates the phrase. Fourth, add further questions, now completely ignoring the context and even the topic. When questions are not answered because the context has been lost, complain about the interlocutor’s dishonesty and cowardliness. When answers are given, ignore them and abuse your admin powers to keep spamming and accusing the interlocutor of breach of rules, while rhetorically puffing up one’s own self-righteousness.
The saddest thing in this is that it’s sheer spam from an admin against his own forum, towards no rational end. Patricking is an admin running amok with whino spam against a regular user who has an impeccable posting record otherwise. It’s an attempt to make some purely subjective accusations self-fulfill after increasing provocation from admin position.
Patricking should reasonably not be possible among a team of admins, but here we have a team of enablers instead. They pretend that they have no concept of spam and of net bullying from admin position.
Actually, pretty much everyone agreed that Erik had responded, while some complained that he had replied but not answered.
You’re right, you two shouldn’t be confused. Barry at least occasionally makes substantive remarks–you never do.
Alan Fox,
Actually, for better or worse, they’re thriving and growing right now. I’m not a BioLogos proponent, but truth be told, their threads are more active than ever and their website has been updated and is well-constructed. They’ve also got a new film coming out. And their Evolution and Christian Faith grant program (http://biologos.org/what-we-do/grant-program/) results will soon be reported.
The key is that they’re combatting YECism in USA among ‘evangelicals.’ People here likely applaud that because it is their primary bain. BioLogos (under Haarsma’s guidance) is much braver than the Discovery Institute and as a result, it has attracted some of the top (mainly evangelical) Christian scholars around the world (like Polkinghorne, who stc just cited). It will be much more difficult to collapse or confuse atheistic evolutionism with theistic evolutionism as a result of that Foundation.
Patrick has been a badger, Erik a weasel. Both of them annoying and pointless.
Just hoping to see the empress’s new clothes. Though I promise to keep my finger to myself.
Thanks for your congrats, but this hasn’t fixed Patrick. He is gravely broken, by all signs beyond repair.
Erik,
He’s a bullying badger, you’re an evasive weasel. Both are bad. I’m not sure which is worse: neither is conducive to civilized debate.
And here I had been planning on naming my new Weasel program written in the C programming language after Salvador.
The source code file name, of course, would be sal.c
You don’t know who is worse? How about an objective measure as follows.
You tried, by means of quite constructive suggestions imho, to make Patrick stop his bullying. He didn’t listen. So he is incorrigible. You have had no specific corrective instructions to me. If you do now, let’s hear. If you don’t, then the record is set.
Sorry. Some secrets have to stay secret. 😉
Sure, here are my instructions (again). Please answer the following questions– without reference to the Bible.
Do you believe there was ever a global flood on the planet earth that left only 8 human survivors?
If yes, (roughly) what year did this global flood take place?
Thanks.
Mung,
I was using the legal meaning of “non-responsive”, not the medical one.
Which was pretty obvious from the context…
Compare this with your words to Patrick, “oh please. you’re just bullying at this point. Spare everyone the self-sanctification of ugly behavior.” http://theskepticalzone.fr/wine-cellar/comment-page-13/#comment-94863
The record is clear. Your objection to me is not even remotely of the same quality.
As to the answers, they were given http://theskepticalzone.fr/wine-cellar/comment-page-13/#comment-94867 and nobody has explained how these are not answers. So, I actually have an objection to you too: Stop pretending that the answers are not there.
Apparently I’ve never made a ‘substantive’ remark here, but just learned my contribution to a major encyclopedia was approved. It overlaps with some of the themes discussed here. But one wouldn’t want to misinterpret that makes me an expert compared with ‘computer programmers’, ‘biolobrats’ and ‘bureaucrats’ who know much more than the average person about just about everything. Oh, and those taxi drivers, too, they are so clever!! 😉 Thanks for even atheist-skeptic support.
Don’t forget retail store clerks!
If it’s really the case that you’re capable of substantive contributions, nobody would know here, why not grace this place with an example of your remarkable wisdom at least occasionally? Here it’s always like the post I’m responding to–insults and self-aggrandizement–never seen anything else from you, Mr. Expert. NEVER.
Gregory, congratulations for having your article selected for publication.
+1
I wonder why Barry hasn’t dropped the banhammer on Phoodoo and Mung? Maybe they’re double-agents Barry sends over here to shit-stir and disrupt?
That’s not the same thing. Stcordova had author rights (could start a new topic) an UD. As far as I know, mung and phoodoo don’t have such rights.
Me too!
Exposed again. Sorry Barry. 🙁
The real issue isn’t my banning. A website owner has the right to invite whom he chooses. When I tried to post there recently, my stuff went to a moderation queue, but later released, so I’m effectively banned even though technically a comment can slip through. I recently wanted to wish RDFish a Merry Christmas over yonder.
Barry moderating my comments is a bit of joke since I don’t think Barry is more senior in his understanding of the science topics than I.
What the real issue is is that after promoting ID at UD and elsewhere, when I express disagreement with the ID crowd and acknowledge the critics are right in their criticism, that is considered behaving like an enemy. The issue is being marginalized and called a Nazi Collaborator because I express dissent. Ah the irony, a website that was named after the book Uncommon Dissent!
Upright BiPed and William Murray have author privileges at both sites, but they don’t dispute and disagree with other UD authors like I do. Here is an example which Larry Moran called accurately:
http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2014/04/what-would-happen-if-intelligent-design.html
How many other ways have I broken the rule? Hmm….
1. 2nd law of thermodyanmics should not be used to defend ID (harsh criticism of fellow author Granville Sewell, Niwrad, Kairos Focus). I mean does it matter to BornAgain77 and others that I have graduate level statistical mechanics and have studied Shannon’s theorems in my Electrical Engineering discipline? I was appalled at how people bloviate about the 2nd law when they can’t even do freshman chemistry calculation for the entropy of an Ice Cube or a Copper coin (as I have done at TSZ), much less understand some of the finer points. I see all the stuff asserted about information theory, but I studied information theory — the formal classes are called “Communication and Information Theory” and “Digital Communications” and “Digital Signal Processing”. I posted more on Shannon’s theorems than anyone at UD, but I still get contested there by fellow IDists about it.
2. Self-evident truths and morality (what the heck is this doing on an ID blog, not to mention it’s not Biblical)
3. ID should not be promoted as science
4. Agreeing with Mathgrrl (Patrick of TSZ) that no one on the ID side seems capable of calculating CSI bits in CSI V2. I was the first to suggest alternate methods such as the law of large numbers. The ID community should be embarrassed about the state of affairs, but I end up being the fall guy for saying something. What do I tell my ID college students? Don’t use information arguments.
5. I was partly responsible for hanging out to dry one of the reviewers of Bio-Complexity, Branko Kouzulic as Larry Moran pointed out. Oops, I’ll never publish there. Dr. Torley was more gracious, and I tried to warn him not to say certain things, but he got hung out to dry too.
6. I had a sharp disagreement with Winston Ewert on this example. We were polite, but the disagreement remains and Mark Frank sided with me:
It highlights issues with the CSI concept that remain problematic.
7. I criticized the Catholic church for some of its practices, like the veneration of statues. I could have said a few more choice things about child molesting Catholic Priests and “self evident” truths.
8. I put one of the UD donors on notice for some of his unjustified derogatory remarks about me.
9. I don’t think highly of the works of Thomas Acquinas. StephenB, VJTorley, Kairos Focus, Barry Arrington, Timaeus, likely Denyse O’leary consider Acquinas a Catholic saint. I’m a protestant, and I think Thomas Acquinas is totally irrelevant today’s question of ID.
10. I commended RDFish many times when he was right especially when he called out StephenB for some really flimsy arguments to support the existence of ID and God.
11. I embarrassed Barry when he posted this on Thermodynamics, and then Gordon Davisson finished him off:
12. I shortly thereafter saluted Gordon Davisson’s work and praised his two Nobel Prize winning relatives Clinton J. Davisson (grandfather) and Owen W. Richardson (grand uncle). Not good to praise the guy who just humiliated the boss. But dangit Gordon Davisson knows physics and entropy and information theory, Barry on the other hand?
I also put in good words for Joe Felsenstein.
12. I suggested ID should consider AI as form of intelligence in the design inference. Niwrad went ballistic on that because it opened the possibility of atheist ID!
13. I said YEC could be relevant. Barry removed my posting privileges after I wrote that Armitage filed a lawsuit. That was just an shallow excuse because Denye reported the same thing a few days later and she kept her posting privileges!
14. I said it is ill advised to use the Darwin-Genocide argument because creationists have practised genocide in the Old Testament and they were involved as well in the Eugenics movement with the Darwinists.
What I didn’t like was Barry never wrote to me privately to say, “hey, can you not say that.” I just started writing a post and then discover through the admin panel my privileges are suspended, then I get an e-mail later with a sham excuse.
When I criticized the non-contradiction issue, the next thing I hear is people writing me apparently because Barry is spreading falsehoods about me on e-mail channels (I can only imagine if he calls me Nazi Collaborator to my face, what he said behind my back.)
Barry tolerated commenters calling me all sorts of names, and when I said something in return, he threatened to suspend my posting privileges for supposedly spewing venom. My irony meter just about blew. From the big time name caller venom spewer himself threatening to suspend my posting privileges for supposedly spewing venom when I complained about stalking behaviour?
He’d never tolerate that name calling when others do it to him, but he’ll let that sort of behaviour be thrown on me without coming to my defence as Patrick, Alan, Elizabeth and other have done at TSZ even though I’m a creationist.
The issue isn’t about me being banned. It’s about Barry’s double standards and name calling (Nazi Collaborator) and just plain rudeness to someone who served his blog. I put up with it because I didn’t post at UD for him, I did it for myself as an extension of my thought process. He wanted UD to be more of an activist site rather than a site that truly wanted to explore the issues.
The issue is about the backstabbing behaviour I was subjected to after serving UD for 10 years.
After my departure, some IDists told me UD went down the toilet. I was told by several how much they missed my posts there. I seemed to be one of the few (aside from Cornelius Hunter) who delved into science, math and physics topics.
I don’t care. Now UD can have all the KairosFocus postings it can handle.
Well Sal, I’m sorry that you were treated like that. I doubt you ever won’t be YEC or I will, but I’m not going to treat you like that.
UD needs to have their WWJD moment.
This is not a big surprise considering he was given a D-rating by the BBB for harassing phone CALA demanding payment for services he never provided.
But don’t feel disheartened. He bans me on a weekly basis. I just found out that gmail will only allow so many email accounts on a single phone number.