Please use this thread for alerting admins to moderation issues and for discussion or complaints arising from particular decisions.
The Skeptical Zone
"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be mistaken."
Please use this thread for alerting admins to moderation issues and for discussion or complaints arising from particular decisions.
No, Patrick. If the mods have stepped in and stopped the abuse hurled my way then the link never would have been posted. But you hypocrites like it when your opponents are attacked so you let it slide.
And again the fact that I took responsibility is the reason for the banning
You are utterly shameless, Joe.
You were banned specifically because you posted a link to a graphic image of female genitalia, as Patrick rightly states. Taking responsibility would be acknowledging this was unacceptable, apologising and undertaking never to do anything similar here again.
As I recall it wasn’t just Joe posting a link to porn that did him in. Lizzy removed the porn link and asked Joe to promise to not post such things in the future. Joe told her to go f*** herself. THAT was the final straw.
You are utterly pathetic, Alan. No one should have to endure the abuse hurled at me. The fact that I RETALIATE as opposed to instigate is all I care about.
And no, you are wrong. I was banned specifically because I took responsibility for it. To me, given what I was suffering, it was OK, at the time. It won’t ever happen again- not by me.
That you refuse to take responsibility for your inactions says it enough for me. You let abuse go as long as it isn’t evos being abused
Lizzie does believe that redemption is possible. It’s typical of her that she’d go that extra step. My view is that turning a blind eye to the sock puppet, Frankie, was perhaps a step too far.
So you just believe adapa’s lies? Nice
And of course letting me post here has gone to far in your opinion. I just exposed the fact there isn’t a scientific theory of evolution and you agreed- or do you have something other than Darwin to call upon?
Some people make it difficult to take their side, but I hear the guy behind the Miranda ruling wasn’t a saint. I’ve got to partially agree with Frankie here.
I understand the desire for continuity, but the rules make it relatively clear what should be moved to Guano and what should not. Responses to Guano’d comments are not rule violations.
I read it as a comment about another participant’s behavior. It doesn’t appear to violate the rule about addressing the post rather than the poster.
Again, I don’t see what rule this comment violates.
He doesn’t address a specific person, so I’d allow it.
I hope that Elizabeth will find the time to join us here to clarify her vision and the site rules.
ETA: I’d be interested in hearing Neil’s thoughts as well.
Alan if you get rid of me all you are left with is Mung, who doesn’t give a shit and is fucking with you guys- and FMM. Phoodoo doesn’t gib\ve a shit anymore either.
You are close to becoming another useless echo chamber/ circle-jerk forum. If that is what you want- to be worse than UD- go ahead and do it. I can easily poke fun at all of you from a distance
After consultation with Alan I have removed the personally identifying information. I was able to simply redact from one comment but I had to remove the other entirely due to limitations with the blog software. It consisted of a short line of text and the image.
I really, really dislike editing other people’s comments. It’s a bad path to go down, leading to distrust of the admins and people contributing less. Please follow Lizzie’s simple rules, even when they are protecting someone you don’t think deserves it.
Because we all agree on everything all the time!
From one of the other sites your not banned from.. or maybe the well read Untelligent Reasoning!
Thanks for the cooperation. I feel slightly less dirty.
If you hadn’t posted it it wouldn’t have been posted. Man up and own it.
It’s something I’ve always done right from the early days and I’m pretty sure I took the lead from Lizzie. It seems especially logical when guano’d comments are quoted.
I think Lizzie’s enthusiasm for TSZ has waned partly because of the protracted wrangles over moderation. If everyone would like to see Lizzie resume participation here, let me suggest we all make a bigger effort to stay within the aims and guidelines.
Patrick,
I trust your judgement better than mine. I do think the already banned might warrant a tighter leash, through.
I think “angry victim” is his self-authored thing. He’s never responsible for his own actions…
It wouldn’t have been posted if I wasn’t being constantly attacked. And I already “owned it”.
I only just saw that. I’ve been busy on other things today. And seeing the number of new posts did not encourage me to take a look. I’ll assume that you have dealt with the issue.
If one is a materialist atheist, what is the problem with a picture of female genitalia?
You wouldn’t have a problem with a picture of a woman’s elbow would you? What’s the difference?
Isn’t it always?
Mrs. Phoodoo is one lucky gal.
Yup, all set.
People could attack you all day and it wouldn’t get posted until you choose to do so.
Admitting that you did it and actually taking responsibility are two different things. You are still utterly failing to do the latter.
I agree with you here, although there is still a non-neglible probability that we’re one of her experiments.
It violates the rule:
Address the content of the post, not the perceived failings of the poster. [purple text added 28th November 2015]
This rule is constantly violated here at TSZ.
Likewise, making fun of someone for not knowing who Carl Woese was can easily be seen as addressing a perceived failing about what one ought to know but doesn’t.
Hell, calling someone an atheist or a creationist often violates this rule.
I’d make a great mod. 🙂
Right, because I am not a materialist atheist, so to me there is a difference. See how that works Dick?
Now, to you its all monkeys right? Or a platypus in your case.
When I am attacked I attack. It’s my nature. Moderators are here to prevent people from being attacked but since it was me you let it go. Shame on you.
They are? I have already said it will never happen again. I am not going to apologize for sticking up for myself.
phoodoo,
You should write more long posts. They’re your forte.
Patrick,
Lizzie might not come back?? Oh the horror!
Well, carry on, brave guerilla skeptics! Dickie still has Alan to pull his ticks off for him.
phoodoo,
Seriously though Phoodoo, ask to team up with Joe on his blog. You guys can moderate how you see fit. Fill it with epic ID predictions and experiments.
Why is Richie allowed to spew ignorant bullshit about ID? Why is it OK for Richie to think his ignorance is an actual argument? And why is it OK for evos to equivocate like little cowards?
And why is it OK for Richie to call someone “confused” and then offer nonsensical drivel for support?
You cannot allow Richie to do that and then guano all responses to him that use the same level hubris.
Any disagreement violates the rules. All discussion moved to Guano.
It’s a simple solution, at least.
Stuck for days in TSZ post moderation again. They like to keep the safety on when it comes to people skeptical of their mostly atheistical-skepticism who don’t post foamy soap bubbles like Torley. And I don’t care if they delay, there’s little meat on their ‘skeptic’ bones.
Just so y’know. 😉
EES seems to be frighteningly polarizing among biologists – schism!?
Well, it is certainly the case that the entire site right now does bring to mind a big heaping pile of Guano. I don’t think I’ve ever had so many people here on ignore before.
KISS
I just checked and see one post from you pending. Would you like me to release it?
Admins do not get notified when someone publishes a post. Please post here in Moderation Issues if you need us to check.
“Would you like me to release it?”
I’m quite sure you don’t have the imagination for what I would like. Can post or can’t post? Gotta kiss a mod-atheist first each time if you’re on their ‘censor list’?
It’s best to mention it it this (moderation) thread. Otherwise it might not be noticed.
When I checked, it had a date of 12/30/2016. So it was not days waiting approval. I last check around 4 days ago, and did not see it at that time.
It looks as if another moderator has now released it.
Thanks. I think it was 29th. Doesn’t matter. Am I able to edit my own post?
You should find you are able to now.
You could simply politely ask someone with admin privileges to release the post you wrote. Or you could kiss my ass.
In another thread colewd asks:
Yes. It addresses the post, not the poster.
Please raise moderation questions in this thread.
Patrick,
This is not addressing the poster?
Of course it is. But if you try hard you can convince yourself that it is referring to the content of the post and not some failing by the poster.
Frankie and phoodoo just need to learn to couch what they say just a slight bit differently, so as to make sure it is addressed at what the poster wrote, and this site will be much better off.
Your post is nonsense. It smells like something that has been dead for three days. A three year old could write better nonsense. Stuff like that. It addresses the content of your post.
LoL.
It’s an analysis of the quality of the comment and a reference to the history of the commenter. If you feel either is inaccurate, challenge the claim.
Mung, as the word lawyer extraordinaire here I thought you’d appreciate following the letter of the rules.
More empty bluster from Patrick. Like that?
Oh yes. I have an appreciation for it. Don’t get me wrong, lol. 🙂