Re: The problem with all these "Debates".

On Nov 2, 7:44 pm, mike3 <mike4...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 2, 5:41 pm, Ron O <rokim...@xxxxxxx> wrote:





On Nov 2, 2:39 pm, mike3 <mike4...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Nov 2, 7:12 am, Ron O <rokim...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

On Nov 1, 8:04 pm, mike3 <mike4...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Nov 1, 7:33 am, Ron O <rokim...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

On Oct 31, 11:46 pm, mike3 <mike4...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
<snip>
No different here.  Like I said it is just human nature.  You seeall
kinds,  Deal with it.

And so then that's why I don't bother going on it forever, as it just
wastes
time.

<snip>

Well, that is what happens in some cases.  What are you going to do
make it a closed forum?

If you do that, who will you close out?  The guys like Ray and adman,
or the guys that respond to them in what you believe to be an
inappropriate manner?  Take out the cause, or remove what may possibly
be the real victims?  The truth may be ugly, but you aren't going to
change that, by removing a segment just because you want to pretend
that it really isn't that ugly.

Ehmn. If anything maybe not many of either of these would be "fit" for
a
"closed forum"... What is BAD about cutting out stuff like "worthless
ass"
and so on?

You didn't get it did you?  Are you going to ban the guys saying
"worthless ass" or the worthless asses?  

Did you read what I said? You'd have to ban them both, but then
there's
no debate forum. Better if the people don't do it and adopt a more
civilized form of debate -- both of them.

Well, you aren't going to get it done by praying about it.

Where did I say that would get it done???

The point of the sarcasm was that you have no way to "get it done."


SNIP:

Except for Sean they don't seem to post here, and Sean is some small
fish with his own agenda.  All we usually get here are the victims of
the political scam artists.  The problem is that once they find out
how they have been had, a lot of them accept the dishonesty and go
with it rather than back off and wait for an honest effort.

And that's when the "victim" starts to become "blameworthy", right --
because
now it becomes deliberate?

"Blameworthy?" That is just what they do. How people respond to
that varies.

SNIP:

Again, demonstrate that they are mentally incompetent.

Again, I was not claiming a specific case was due to mental
incompetence.
I was asking about what you do in such cases.

So I cannot "demonstrate" it at all and don't have a clue as to how.

So why even put forward the proposition?  If you can't determine
mental incompetence then there is no issue.  Why discuss
hypotheticals?  You have to deal with what you can do.

Because _I_ am not trying to become a moderator here. And what
proposition?
(I might have forgot, this discussion is getting long) I was _asking_
about _what
happens_ _in those cases_.

I basically give up on them. Others keep ragging on them. That
doesn't make them any less incompetent or dishonest.


SNIP:

Good thing that you can't be elected moderator.  You would really
screw up the works and everyone else would have to pay for it.  The
only doubt is are they just mentally incompetent, bogously dishonest,
or a combination of the two.  If you are claiming that since they are
likely mentally incompetent that people should be nicer to them, then
demonstrate that they are mentally incompetent.

Well if they could be proven dishonest then they'd go into the bin
too. So that's
not a good moderator? If, hypothetically, I was a moderator, and did
manage to
judge they were really being truly diishonest liars, I'd ban them from
the forum!
Yep, you read that right! I'd *also* edit out insults and worthless
ass comments. I'd
do BOTH.

You haven't seen these guys operate have you?  Being a moderator with
the bogus types they have on the creationist side would be the utter
pits.  Just take one example:  I was once involved in a discussion
with one of the main ARN ID perps.  This guy sniped out things from my
posts and pretended that I hadn't written what I had written.  It
wasn't the first time he did it, but I confronted the guy about it.  I
just pointed out what he had done.  I didn't call him any names or
anything like that, and some moderator came in and said that I
couldn't do that.  The guy came in to justify what he had done and
threw it into the moderators face by claiming that he had done exactly
what he intended to do.  What is the moderator going to do?  Is he
going to take that as an admission that the guy knew what he was
doing, or should he take it that the guy didn't really want to pull a
fast one.  The ID perp never clarified the issue.  These are the kinds
of people that you have to deal with.  They know how to game the
system.  They rely on people like you with your "doubt," and use it to
do bogus things.

Your system will only work if there were some infallible bogousity
detector.

So then, like it or not, the forum can really only be kept open.- Hide quoted text -


Just go to some place like uncommon descent and read it for a while to
see what happens if you let these types have their way. As bad as you
think it is around here, it could be much worse. You don't see the
primary ID scam artists posting here for the simple reason that these
guys knew that they didn't have jack around a decade ago. The
antiscience creationists can heap abuse on me. Guys like NashT even
throw in some racial slurs, but it doesn't keep me from posting for
the simple reason that I usually know what I am talking about and I
can defend my position. There was even some degenerate that tried
intimidation tactics bringing up my bosses name and where I worked.
It turned out that I wasn't the only one that he tried that junk on.
You can't make this junk up. It is like a bad movie. The ID perps
know that they have nothing that they can defend. If they had a valid
argument you would see hordes of them here beating us over the heads
with it. Instead all you get is what you see.

At uncommon descent, you will probably have to keep on the ball to see
the posts that get deleted for no apparent reason except that they
don't tout the party line. That might be more uncommon than it used
to be simply because so many posters have been banned throughout the
years. Just try to participate for a while. Be as polite as you can
and tell it like it is and see how long you last. Good luck.

http://www.uncommondescent.com/

Ron Okimoto

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The problem with all these "Debates".
    ... no debate forum. ... Getting rid of the brain dead and dishonest would do nothing, ... Because _I_ am not trying to become a moderator here. ... only doubt is are they just mentally incompetent, bogously dishonest, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Gerritsen Sentenced
    ... Why mention that the Senator "lost an election" if it doesn't attempt to ... This newsgroup is not a national political election forum. ... You WILL find that true moderator tasks will have to be ...
    (rec.radio.amateur.policy)
  • Re: The problem with all these "Debates".
    ... Getting rid of the brain dead and dishonest would do nothing, ... the creationist political scam artists look more legit than they are. ... only doubt is are they just mentally incompetent, bogously dishonest, ... If, hypothetically, I was a moderator, and did ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: CSS vs WoS forums
    ... a web forum... ... threatened by the moderator with being thrown off the forum for using ... I also don't like IRC for similar reasons, as the channel ops are ... lose the posts, whereas with newsgroups and email lists you either ...
    (comp.sys.sinclair)
  • Re: Deja Vu
    ... personal physics forum on internet. ... it must happen on mega scale second time. ... Show your authority and ban me. ... The Talk.Origins moderator is comfortable with his authority. ...
    (talk.origins)
Loading