Please use this thread for (and only for) alerting admins to moderation issues and for raising complaints arising from particular decisions. We remind participants that TSZ is a benign dictatorship, the property of Dr. Elizabeth Liddle. All decisions regarding policy and implementation are hers alone.
We’re all afraid liars, I’m afraid to say (though I do so here, lyingly).
Who actually needs moderators–even good ones (not like Alan, ffs!!), when keiths is around to police for fear and lying?
That’s a familiar walto strategy. Afraid to answer a question? Just mock your opponent and hope no one notices the evasion.
I noticed, walto.
Both walto and (belatedly) newton seem to realize that they would look foolish defending Alan’s excuse.
Is there anyone out there who actually believes Alan’s excuse for closing comments, and is willing to explain why?
Yes, and (pay attention here, keiths, this is the important bit), no, not to you, respectively.
Also, “lies”, You keep using that word, I do not think it means…
I reject your hypothesis that it was to hide something from view, therefore unless you have another alternate explanation ,I take Alan at his word.
You are mistaking the fear of looking foolish with a lack of interest.
That’s probably why Neil closed comments in Tom’s thread too.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Sure. Me. I believe him.
I believe that Alan sincerely believes that Lizzie meant for Moderation Issues to be ONLY about Moderation Issues. I also believe he’s wrong about that, and that the record is quite clear on the matter that she did not have any such intent.
I think Alan’s deluding himself, and I get to say so, because I can.
ETA: Alan is sincerely deluded.
Mung,
Inconceivable!
What else did she mean Moderation Issues to be if not Moderation issues?
Not just afraid and dishonest. I ABSOLUTELY SUUUUCCKKK!
(Good thing there are so many of us (everyone who’s ever disagreed with keiths), or I might have to damage myself.
keiths:
newton:
You’ve shown plenty of interest. The squirming only kicked in when you realized your “defense” was going nowhere.
You guys (including Jock) would love to prove me wrong by showing that Alan’s excuse was actually valid. But it wasn’t valid, and you know that, which is why none of you is willing to defend it. You’d look ridiculous.
Look at it again:
It’s a laughable, phony excuse, so of course none of you can defend it.
The real reason that Alan closed comments is obvious: He had just disgraced himself, in the ALurker affair, with a spectacular display of incompetence, dishonesty, and moderator abuses. He couldn’t erase the evidence, so he took the only option available to him as a moderator and closed comments, right in the middle of a vigorous discussion.
It was a blatant abuse of moderator privileges for his personal benefit.
Typical Alan Fox behavior, in other words.
Amusingly, not even Alan has stepped up to defend his phony excuse.
Amusing?! It’s fucking hilarious!! I mean, WTF??? Am I right?
Worse. Lying, fearful, ridiculous.
Its beyond me the professionalism TSZ is demonstrating.
colewd,
Well, that is one of the disadvantages of refusing to participate here.
colewd:
TSZ doesn’t dictate what its members write. If you have an issue with Glen, take it up with him.
Poor walto is all wound up.
And still afraid to answer my simple question about whether he believes Alan’s ridiculous excuse for closing comments.
keiths,
Apparently not:-)
DNA_Jock,
.
Can’t say I blame him. This is turning incoherent ranting into and art form.
God you’re stupid.
Shithead GP was an incoherent asshole, largely ignoring all that I had written to repeat his egregious nonsense. Naturally, you’re no better, just another lying dumbfuck who simply pulls up goalposts every time his moronic claims are shot down.
Of course you’re not the least bit concerned about GP’s gross dishonesty, because it’s akin to your own. You whine like a turbocharger about GP being called on his passive-aggressive assholery, though, because it’s also the kind of shit you pull. You’re disgusting.
Glen Davidson
GlenDavidson,
What is passive aggressive assholery anyway?
Gpuccio is making you look foolish because you cannot make a coherent counter argument without committing a logical fallacy. Argue you position competently or give it up.
You’re so stupid, you’re just pulling those lies right out of your ass. There’s not a single logical fallacy that I made, and none that was even alleged by that dumbass. He just drones on restating the same lies that he began with. If you want to show that you’re anything but a dedicated liar, find one logical fallacy that I made.
You just lie.
You didn’t back up a single charge you made, you mindless fuckwad. So you’re not only the liar that you have always been, you’re hypocritical to the hilt.
My problem with both of you scurrilous shitbags is that you never argue honestly, let alone competently. I waste good arguments on completely dishonest people like you, and you emphasize what a dishonest jerk you are by just writing more lies.
If you were better, you’d finally make an honest case.
Glen Davidson
It always ends this way, doesn’t it?
Creationists can never make an honest case, so they just spew as many lies as they can, like colewd and GP. And they whine piteously about how badly they’re treated, when they’re nothing but total liars, at least on this matter.
I’ve said it before, but I think it’s worth saying again: Assertive creationism is something that turns its adherents into some of the worst liars on the planet. It’s an endless retreat into lies as they forever fail to make an honest case for their BS beliefs, and they end up being dishonest about almost everything, from epistemology to logic, and on to the facts.
Only lies “support” their ID/creationism, so in the end they are capable of little other than lying (at least about ID/creationism), like colewd in this thread.
Glen Davidson
GlenDavidson,
Just look at what you wrote to me here.
Here is to Gpuccio.
Fuckwad
Moron
Too dumb
insipid lies
Are you aware of what you are writing? These are crass ad hominem attacks. They show that you have no confidence in your position. You don’t understand gpuccio’s arguments and your lack of a coherent counter argument is evidence of that.
Fucking liar.
Back up your stupid lies, or shut up you egregious moron.
I only resort to this because you and GP won’t even address the issues, but merely repeat lies, including your disgusting lies about people. You can’t back up anything, from science to the lies you always told about the actually honest people.
Btw, one reason I’m telling the truth about that lying fuck GP is that I hope he’ll quit any attempt at discussion with me, since he’s as egregious a liar as you are.
So you fucked up again, not able to back up your putrid lies. Typical lewd cole.
Glen Davidson
keiths,
What I don’t need to defend against are your hyperbolic misrepresentations. It seems others take them as seriously as I do.
keiths:
Alan:
Who are you kidding? Not one person among the entire readership has stepped forward to say “Alan’s reason for closing comments actually makes sense, and here’s why.” Not one.
They’d look pitiful trying, and they know it. Your excuse makes no sense. No one can defend it.
Not even you.
Your excuse was so obviously a lie that not even you will defend it.
As for the ALurker affair itself, what have I misrepresented?
Here’s what happened. You had to issue a humiliating apology for what you did.
Where’s the misrepresentation?
Shit–I forgot to add “wound up.” Sorry. There are just so many to remember!!
Moderators should take a look at the Ubiquitin thread. Most of the comments need to go to Guano, and alas, those comments are overwhelmingly from “our” side.
There will be anger, but it’s that or delete the rules.
Why don’t you try reading the rules?
I guess certain words are too much for such a sensitive soul, while the gross dishonesty and stupidity of someone like GP troubles you not.
There won’t be anger if you and GP quit making shit up.
Glen Davidson
Is there a particular rule you think he’s missed?
Copied from Rules:
Assume all other posters are posting in good faith.
For example, do not accuse other posters of being deliberately misleading
Address the content of the post, not the perceived failings of the poster. [purple text added 28th November 2015]
This means that accusing others of ignorance or stupidity is off topic
Am I “making shit up” when I conclude that you, and others, are doing exactly these?
I’ve been watching.
If gpuccio were posting here, then a lot of comments would have gone to guano. But he is posting at UD, and I am not attempting to follow him there.
This is the problem with debates between distinct blogs.
Joe Felsenstein,
Insulting gpuccio, while unseemly and probably counter-productive, is not against the rules, since he has declined to post here.
Even colewd conceded that gpuccio had made that choice.
OTOH, comments addressed to colewd would need to abide by the rules.
ninja’d
🙂
Yes, clearly.
Sheesh.
Glen Davidson
OK, I have been ninja’d, and retract my statements that calling names is out. It is apparently just fine as long as gpuccio has not posted here. (It is counterproductive: gpuccio is wiping the floor with Glen simply by quoting his insults).
Wow, that’s a really impressive intellectual standard you hold out there.
The same sort that led you to misrepresent the rules so badly and make false charges against another.
Well, I wouldn’t have expected you to come out in favor of honest discourse after that.
Glen Davidson
Mods,
There is a pending comment in the queue from a new commenter, lorenzosleakes.
Certainly results in gpuccio being able to toss the baby of cogent argument away with the bathwater of insults.
Lizzie invoked the idea of honorary member to kairosfocus during a previous across-the-garden-wall discussion with KF at UD. Though, then, the issue was outing and some here were using KF’s real name rather than his internet pseudonym.
keiths,
Already done. Whilst the headsup is appreciated, the “pending comment” flag is the first thing I notice on opening up TSZ.
Yeah, right, like he wasn’t already tossing out the cogent arguments just to lie and repeat his unsound premises in a condescending manner.
You’re not doing much better at understanding causality than GP is.
Glen Davidson
That’s true. I’m dubious about the whole idea of determinism and chains of causality.
I agree that it is counterproductive.
Red herring.
ETA:
So?
GP isn’t a Creationist, but I don’t suppose that really matters.