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.
phoodoo,
Links? If that is too much work, start with one, your best example perhaps.
Alan Fox,
Alan, why would you need links to know if a comment is a rules violation? You guano a comment from Nonlin, that is no rules violation whatsoever, you get scolded by not only KN, but then also Jock and finally Allan, and then finally you say, Oh, ok, well if Allan thinks it shouldn’t have been sent to guano, I guess I better move it back. What the fuck is that, why do you need his approval? Four other people already told you how ridiculous it was. Then he says so and you realize it? And then you are incapable of saying why other comments much worse were not moved.
You know every time keiths has criticized you about what a terrible job you do here, he is right. You say you can’t fathom how religious people believe what they do. I think part of the reason why is you lack a level of self-awareness for your own actions first, so how could you possibly have the wherewithal to understand why others think the way they do. If the job is really too hard for you Alan, don’t be embarrassed to admit it. Others already know this.
phoodoo,
If only there were some means available for you not to be exposed to this tide of awfulness.
Allan Miller,
You are under the false impression that it matters to me if Alan is another in a long line of biased atheist moderators trying to censure real discussion. It doesn’t affect me, I already know what he is. My entire purpose is simply to expose him. He thinks I should help him by providing him links and informing him when posts break the rules, as if he can’t see them? Why would I ever want to help him, I know what he is doing. But just as keiths and Mung and others have done, I just am glad that others who may come to this site and think it is a fair open place for discussion about science issues, then will see the way it actually is.
Alan thinks he helps his cause by trying to protect you and Jock and others from being handed your hat. But then people see, Oh, theskepticalzone, its just another atheist group of preachers, that pretend they are unbiased as a PR stunt. It is why this site was founded, and it continues to this day. If it didn’t get pointed out, newcomers to here might not realize it.
Alan’s purpose is to drive away dissenting opinions, then it looks like your side has scored some kind of philosophical win. Why would people like Bill Cole or Paul Nelson or people from the Discovery Institute post here, when they see the way this place is run? They wouldn’t. See, everyone here agrees with Allan. They agree with Jock. They agree with your muse Adapa. They must be right, look at the consensus. That’s Alan’s goal.
Its the Fox news of science talk approach. Coincidence?
phoodoo,
Yes, of course it doesn’t matter to you. Your many posts on the subject make very clear how little it matters.
Oh, the oppression!
TSZ has a very short list of banned users. (I could think of three, one of which is Joe Gallien.) No deleted posts or comments (a few edited where there was outing of fellow members).
Anyone can come here and post comments within the limits of no spam, no porn, no illegal stuff and the worst they can expect is for the odd comment to move to “guano”.
It’s almost criminal!
To get feedback from skeptics and critics? Comments from critics aren’t allowed on ID websites. The most egregious example being Arrington and UD.
But it’s politics, not science or reality, that is important in the ID camp.
But phoodoo, if your goal is to expose Alan (and me and Neil, I hope) for the dishonest charlatans that you think we are, surely you should provide links: the benefits are multiple.
1) We cannot hide behind the “I didn’t see it/I cannot find it” excuse.
2) All other visitors to the site will be able to see the despicable nature of the unguano’ed comment in its original context. In particular the absence of reason behind the awful behavior.
Virtually every time that you complain about moderation, you display your ignorance of the ruleset at TSZ. We have explained these things to you many times, to zero effect. Asking, as you do here, why Allan’s opinon of the guano’ed comment matters more than mine or KN’s, it yet another instance of you displaying your ignorance.
Check out the rules; it is there in black and white.
All you had to do was follow the rules. Seems you and Lizzie couldn’t do that.
DNA_Jock,
Right. I am sure impartial observers would have a real hard time knowing if these broke the rules or not. Really hard to say. I can see the quandary for the moderators.
Perhaps you are color blind. You can’t see black and white.
Me, Lizzie and a considerable number of others. In fact anyone who made the owner or the regulars uncomfortable by presenting inconvenient facts. I don’t think there is any high ground for you in comparing UD moderation policy with here.
I think this thread is the source of phoodoo’s quotes. (Comments page 5)
That’s guano.
If you had pointed that out to me in a timely manner, with a link, I would definitely have guano’ed it. For most of the others, I’d need to see the context.
In all cases, I would also need to FIND the comment in order to guano it. It may come as a surprise, but I don’t read every comment made on the site. For instance, I only recently noticed this comment, which inexplicably escaped the guano-hammer when you made it. I would not normally guano a comment when the conversation has moved on, but that one was a bit much.
So you need to provide a link. I know it is one of the many things that you do not understand, but the purpose of guano is primarily to protect a conversation against flaming. It is not to protect anyone’s delicate feelings against being told things they don’t like. With the exception noted above.
Looking at that now, it seems more like parody than guano.
And, so?
phoodoo,
And so?
Alan Fox,
Do those posts break the rules or don’t they?
phoodoo,
This one is a guano candidate. I see I guano’d a later comment of Adapa’s and I don’t see further rule-breaking comments from him in that thread.
Wow, you are bringing playing dumb to a new level.
Is this rule breaking Alan?
Is this rule breaking Alan?
Is this rule breaking Alan?
Is this rule breaking Alan?
Is this rule breaking Alan?
Is this rule breaking Alan?
Alan ignored everyone of those comments.
But this, oh this was a problem from Nonlin!:
Yea, you are really impartial Alan.
start your own blog phodoo. Show everyone how it’s done. moderate as you see fit.
phoodoo,
Phoodoo is still making his moronic Creationist demands.
Look, your demands are correctly categorized as that. Nobody said that you were or are a moron there, just that your demands are moronic creationist canards.
Which is demonstrably true! Just like your opinions on fitness, more creationist shit.
You don’t get a free pass on the quality of your ideas. Nor on your support for your claims Mr FBI loves Uri Geller.
Suck it up, person making creationist claims who does not like getting called out on it.
phoodoo,
I was not clear enough for you, obviously. By “further” I meant, subsequent to or following from (later than, if you can grasp that) my intervention.
Moderators, please remove this comment from Omagain as soon as possible. The danger to this site of talking about moderation in the wrong thread can not be overstated.
If I had moved your earlier post to guano, then I would also have moved that one (the reply). Instead, I chose to consider them within the give and take of discussion. Other moderators might disagree.
Neil Rickert,
My post? What post? I made no discussions of moderation in that thread. I would never do that. Because I know the danger of mentioning the word moderation in any thread but this one. I have been told countless times that mentioning that word anywhere but here could cause the entire site, perhaps the entire internet, to spontaneous combust in a toxic fireball.
In fact, if you allow a post that contains the word moderators, or moderation to remain on another thread, I am quite sure Alan is going to come on here and ban you as a future admin, and probably report you to Lizzie before summarily removing your ability to ever post here again. So I am not just reminding you NOT JUST for the safety of this website, but for your own health as well.
Alan is going to remove it either way, because he has been so adamant that this can never be allowed, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, so you might as well do it first to save trouble.
Pretty much in agreement with Neil, here. Phoodoo”s comment was offensive and I was wondering what to do about it when OM responded.
PS @ phoodoo
Use-mention distinction.
Alan Fox,
Wait, what?? You mean someone CAN ask for moderator to intervene on a thread not about moderation?? And the site won’t explode?
But what about all the times you said this can’t be done. What about all of the warnings about banning if it happened again?
Oh wait, you are a huge hypocrite, I almost forgot.
Surprised you have a problem with hypocrisy. I mean, I’ve linked to specific examples of you doing precisely what you accuse Alan of. What’s sauce for the goose etc.
Perhaps you should pray to your all powerful god for a) a more even distribution of coconuts and b) to make Alan behave as you believe he should behave.
I agree with Neil and Alan, both re the Guenter Parche comment and the use/mention distinction.
On the up side, it’s nice to see that phoodoo is capable of including a link to a comment when he puts on one of his performances. That’s progress, I reckon.
Imagine that! Who could have predicted??
So Omagain wasn’t talking about moderation then. Interesting.
Alan is still trying to manipulate things here. There is nothing against the rules in this post and he know it:
As a reminder, here are the posts Alan DIDN’T think were a problem:
This is why I’d never want to be a moderator. How, I wonder, would I handle posts containing BOTH gratuitous insults and substantive discussion? Do the moderators have “line item veto” powers, to send only part of a post to guano? Would I regard such “hybrid” posts more positively if they were posted by someone whose opinions match mine? If not, how would I avoid my moderation appearing biased? Should I bring the hammer down on relevant and informative posts solely because moderation is mentioned, or must moderation be criticized?
My personal inclination is to simply let posts ride EXCEPT if they include links to malware. I wouldn’t even mind off-topic porn (is there any other kind)? But I’ve seen, over decades of reading these discussion forums, that threads have a tendency to degenerate into pure name-calling. I guess I’d just have to assume that well-behaved posters would simply drop out of such threads.
If the amount of insult is small, I may let it pass.
Today there was one with too many insults. It has been sent to guano. The author can rewrite without the insults and resubmit if he/she so desires.
Not in this case.
In fact, I would have liked to respond to remarks non-lin directed at me in that guano’d comment and insofar as the guanoing was as a result of insults directed at me, I’d request judicious application of Jock’s stochastic filter. 🙂
What was the gratuitous insult in the post by nonlin? Do he call someone a scientifically illiterate idiot (apparently that would have been ok)?
Did he say “Playing the screaming evolutionist moron suits you to a tee?
What about “I think it’s great the way you don’t mind making yourself look like such a fool every day .”?
Did he say “I wonder what psychological issue gives you cause to demonstrate what a clueless idiot you are on such a regular basis? Coronavirus attacking your brain?” Is that the insult? because that I guess would be ok.
Or maybe he said “Alan is still playing the clown to hide his ignorance.”?
Or was it “Alan is still acting as their shit-stirring enabler.”
Anything like any of these?
Would you like to become a moderator, phoodoo?
We need a “phoodoo’s complaints about the Moderation Thread” thread.
I’ve just gotten an error — something like “Cannot create TeX file” — entering a simple LaTeX math expression. Perhaps you will see it here:
I get the same when testing. It looks as if something is broken.
I have a problem with TSZ timing out. My service is pretty poor currently but it is only TSZ that times out. Anyone else having a problem?
Alan Fox,
Yes, been a bit sketchy since yesterday. Sometimes loads, sometimes not, sometimes get home screen then timeout on the next click.
Alan Fox,
Yes, I have been seeing that problem. It seems to be fine today (so far), but it was a problem yesterday.
I passed on a request to the site-owner to maybe check with the hosting service.
This thread is for discussing moderation issues. Sheesh.
Dear admins/moderators.
Richardthughes created a thread with the only content being a link to a video. In 12 pages of comments there’s been no further participation by Richardthughes.
Why do you allow such obvious trolling?
Not buying the premise of your question, Mung, but obvious trolling is not against the rules.
I had always just assumed you were aware of this.