Sandbox (1)

Sometimes very active discussions about peripheral issues overwhelm a thread, so this is a permanent home for those conversations.

1,772 thoughts on “Sandbox (1)

  1. I want Gregory to be told to put back up the rest of the comments he deleted. I know that one of mine which he deleted was not important, and I don’t know if there were any other people he affected (besides Thornton re the song lyrics Lizzie has restored) but it’s the principle of the thing. Gregory said he still had the deleted comments – how that works, I have no idea.

  2. There were 7 comments put in trash from that thread. If those are the only ones, then they can easily be restored. I think Gregory has the ability to do that. At least one of those trashed comments has been edited since originally posted.

    Note: there’s also an older comment in trash from a different thread. And there’s a newer comment in trash from the thread being discussed, but which is in trash because it is a duplicate — the first attempt went to moderation, and the posted retried and succeeded.

  3. What hotshoe said.

    The contents of my edited / deleted material aren’t important at all. What is critically important is the principle that someone could be dishonest enough to change others’ posts without their knowledge or approval while leaving the edited versions in the original author’s name.

    It’s hard for me to think of any behavior more despicable on a public discussion board. I still feel it should be a ban-worthy offense.

  4. Lizzie,
    Having read the whole thread now I have the fear that Gregory is planning a whole set of these spoon-feeding exercises. You may want to give advance thought to whether you want the blog spammed in that way. If post titles are unchangeable and this is his plan perhaps the suggestion could be made that he gets one more post with an encompassing title that he can claim for all the future drivel he intends to spew.

  5. While I agree with all the criticisms directed at Gregory’s internet etiquette we all have the choice to respond, or not, to any post made by Gregory or anyone else.

  6. I wouldn’t call it spoon feedin. I would call it a particularly obnoxious form of “gotcha” word lawyering. So far it looks like apologetics on steroids.

  7. Gregory gets seriously exercised about “evolutionism”; but I wonder how he would rate the seriousness of that compared with “climate changism”?

  8. It seems reasonable to restore these comments to sandbox, so I’ve done it. Please point out any errors. Moving things does not destroy anything. Deletion needs making permanent but creative editing of another’s post is worse (in that original content is permanently lost and does not need an extra keystroke to make it permanent) than deleting permanently.

  9. To which I replied:

    😀
    And I counted sixteen, going on seventeen, non-evolvable things there.

    Plus Allan’s seventeen makes 34.

    Plus Alan’s 600 billion trillion (and that’s just counting the ones that live *in* humans)
    Quantitative predictions not Gregory’s strong suit.
    Which raises the question… 😕

  10. I see Gregory does not know the definition of ad hominem like the rest of its ilk.

    Insults and colorful language are not ad hominem.

  11. ◾Address the post, not the poster.
    ◾This means that accusing others of ignorance or stupidity is off topic
    ◾As is implying that other posters are mentally ill or demented.

  12. Couple of weird things.

    The posts always have a terrifically off (from my point of view) time stamp. I just checked my profile and my time zone was wrong. I reset it to Eastern time (i.e. God’s time). Now the posts show time five hours ahead of my local time. My computer clock shows 5:18 PM and the preview shows 10:13 PM. Ah, 10:13 is when I started the post, now it shows 10:18 PM. ??

    I notice a black menu at the top of my window which gives me admin access. I don’t need that and I bet nobody intended to give it to me.

    That said, your WordPress is seriously out-of-date. 3.61 just came out and fixed some serious security holes, and I think some of the updates between 3.5.2 and 3.6.1 also fixed serious holes.

  13. The posts always have a terrifically off (from my point of view) time stamp.

    I’m pretty sure that the blog is set to use Lizzie time (British Standard Time, London time).

    I notice a black menu at the top of my window which gives me admin access.

    Actually, you have author access. You could start a new topic if you wished. But you cannot edit or delete comments by other people, except in topics of which you are the author.

    That said, your WordPress is seriously out-of-date.

    I’m leaving that to Lizzie.

  14. Gregory:Lizzie, this ad hom goes beyond the pale.

    If what you are peddling was of genuine value and you had any real faith in it the mockery wouldn’t bother you.

    eta:
    On the off chance someone wants to accuse me of dismissing another’s perception about their own feelings;

    Most people who have truly astounding things to relate would view the opposition you face as a challenge. Not something to whine about to the house mother.

  15. Gregory, you can dish it out but you can’t take it:

    Stop being lazy and myopic in denial.

    That’s just one example from this page, less than an hour before you decided to cry for mommy because the big boys are being mean to you․ Surely you cannot have forgotten your own mean words so quickly! Or is it just that it’s different when you do it, because you’re so special?

    Yeah, I’ll take “special” for $500, Alex.

  16. Thank you for your edit․
    I agree it’s important not to deny people’s experience as they see it – something I’m guilty of far too often myself․

    But having said that, I think you have nothing to worry about here․ Evidence in Gregory’s words and behavior in this thread is that he’s not hurt; evidence is that he’s saying the meanest things he thinks he can get away with and rules-lawyering to get the “authorities” to smack down his opponents for conduct no worse than what he indulges himself in․

  17. I’m not sure if there are announced guidelines. The main thing is thoughtful ideas tempered with common sense. If you mess up on a technicality, such as failing to split a long post, we can fix that for you.

    Checking your membership, you were listed as subscriber. I’ve changed that to author, so that you can start a topic. Look for the “New” link at the top of the page. You can probably work out how to use the editor.

  18. Yes or no: is the following statement consistent with TSZ rules?

    “Get a life. Go see a shrink about your obsessive-compulsive disorder.” – Neil Rikert

    These rules are listed in Moderation:
    ◾Address the post, not the poster.
    ◾This means that accusing others of ignorance or stupidity is off topic
    ◾As is implying that other posters are mentally ill or demented.

    As far as I heard, Neil Rickert is an administrator on this site. If he can get away with saying such things, then TSZ is not a place I’d feel welcome visiting.

    Thanks for clarifying whether the rules are just made to be broken by new admins or if they are actually rules. I’m sure that Lizzie would never say such things as the above.

  19. There is also this rule:

    If you have author permissions, and post an OP, you may find you have the technical ability to edit comments to your post, and move them. Please do not do so. Rule violating posts will be moved by moderators, and it is a principle of this site that comments are not edited, deleted, or hidden. [text in purple]

    *Violation of rule in purple will result in immediate and permanent ban (14.05.2012)

  20. Thanks, Alan. That seems to be a new addition, which I was not aware of. I stated this on “The Limits of Evolutionism” thread, confirming with Lizzie that now I am aware of and will abide by those rules.

    In regard to purple/pink, it seems to me the text you cite above is pink, not purple. In any case, I’m sure you agree that Neil’s personal attack is against TSZ rules & appropriate for Guano.

  21. Thanks Lizzie. I certainly don’t mind tough criticism and challenges to what I write here or requests to back up claims and statements with evidence. I recently made an ‘authors’ mistake without knowing it and admitted it openly. I am not perfect and neither is anyone else in their knowledge. But the personal attacks, accusations and insinuations must stop. ‘Skeptical’ and ‘aggressive anti-theist’ are not equivalents and I had thought that theists are welcome too at TSZ.

    Btw, how can I contact you by e-mail? The contact we had before was a no-reply address.

  22. It certainly seems likely that the block is using British time, but there is something wrong. My time zone is set to Eastern Standard, five hours before GMT, but the time stamps I see are in GMT. So before, when my time zone was set to GMT, it was displaying GMT+5. Now it’s displaying GMT+5-5. All the blogs and forums I’ve seen manage to display proper timestamps as long as my time zone is set correctly in my profile.

    Not a big deal, but a bit annoying.

  23. Thank you all.

    Alan Fox:There is also this rule:

    If you have author permissions, and post an OP, you may find you have the technical ability to edit comments to your post, and move them.Please do not do so.Rule violating posts will be moved by moderators, and it is a principle of this site that comments are not edited, deleted, or hidden.[text in purple]

    *Violation of rule in purple will result in immediate and permanent ban (14.05.2012)

    That is not a concern for me. Editing other people’s words is pretty reprehensible.

    I was mainly wondering if there was an ethos for what constituted acceptable content beyond explaining why ID is a mistaken position. (Though still a scientific post in nature.)

  24. When I maintained a blog of my own a while ago, I applied the criterion of “would I let my mother (who was pretty broad-minded) read this post or comment”. Other than that, no moderation and no bans.

    I was very sceptical of Lizzie’s approach and attempt at dialogue with UD frequenters at first and I am happy to admit that I was wrong. Lizzie’s rules are the minimum for civilized dialogue and applied by her with a light and fair touch. It’s just a shame that moderation or the threat of it is necessary at all.

  25. Neil Rickert,

    Thanks Neil.

    And based on it, this http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/?p=3106&cpage=3#comment-31105
    and this: http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/?p=3106&cpage=3#comment-31109
    and this: http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/?p=3106&cpage=3#comment-31107
    and this: http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/?p=3106&cpage=3#comment-31082

    …can also go, right? They don’t add anything constructive to the thread and are simply about a poster, following your Guano-bound lead.

    Likewise, I’ll accept that these can go to:
    http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/?p=3106&cpage=3#comment-31066
    http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/?p=3106&cpage=3#comment-31084

    I cannot erase or move now, unless/until Lizzie re-instates this ‘role’. So it’s up to Neil to clean up his mess.

  26. No Gregory, those are not beyond the pale. I’ll repeat what I said earlier in a different way. If you had a real problem to make an argument about and actually made it instead of editing/deleting posts and whining about your treatment then we would have something to engage over. You aren’t doing that. We are calling out your behavior because there isn’t anything else to do, not to mention it was pretty atrocious. Whining about the mockery instead of adding substance just confirms there is no substance. To use an old saying; There is no there, there.

    Having said that, I do agree calling you mentally ill was too far.

    Hotshoe and I, however, have nothing to apologize for.

  27. It seems like what Gregory wants is a paean to his (alleged) genius that is unpolluted by anything suggesting he isn’t.

  28. On Mung and abuse of hospitality. I opened up TSZ this morning and 14 of the 25 most recent comments were his. That’s not definitive but it is telling.

    eta:
    and why do comments in the Sandbox not appear in proper order?

  29. Heh. I know at least one site where that comment rate woud attract the owner’s attention on suspicion of trolling or spamming, and would draw a warning to comment less – but hopefully more intelligently 😉

  30. Neil Rickert:I’m not sure if there are announced guidelines.The main thing is thoughtful ideas tempered with common sense.If you mess up on a technicality, such as failing to split a long post, we can fix that for you.

    Checking your membership, you were listed as subscriber.I’ve changed that to author, so that you can start a topic.Look for the “New” link at the top of the page.You can probably work out how to use the editor.

    Nope. I can’t find a ‘New’ link anywhere on the home page, the admin page, or anywhere else. Suggestions?

  31. I have it now. However, having seen the backpage and all you have to deal with (some of those titles are cringe worthy) and how some of the other OP’s have bent, I doubt I can make one that distinguishes itself as genuinely separate and original. I’ll keep watching and wait.

    Please accept an apology for adding to your load.

  32. Over at UD in one of Sal Cordova’s threads:

    Mung September 20, 2013 at 6:37 pm

    I’D LIKE TO THANK SAL FOR HIS EDITORIAL REVISIONS OF MY POSTS. I’VE BEEN BANNED FROM ALL DISCUSSIONS HE AUTHORS. BUT LIKE A KNUCKLEHEAD I KEEP SHOWING UP UNIVITED IN HIS DISCUSSIONS EVEN THOUGH I KNOW THAT DOING SO WILL INVITE EDITORIAL REVISION OF MY POSTS. I GUESS I KEEP SHOWING UP UNINVITED DESPITE BEING BANNED BECAUSE I REALLY DESPISE SAL AND AM SO JEALOUS OF HIM AND JUST WANT TO MAKE TROUBLE FOR HIM BY STALKING HIS THREADS.

    MY NAME IS MUNG AND THAT RHYMES WITH DUNG.

    Mung – if you happen to see this, can you verify that the shouty crap projection and name-calling is Sal’s edit of your comment, not your actual comment?

    I want it on the record what kind of wad Sal is, so that people will know, in case Sal decides to “grace” us with xis presence again sometime.

  33. While I like the single page version of the OP’s, unlimited comments per page makes the Sandbox and Guano very unwieldy. You may need to close them when they get too big and create Sandbox2, Guano2, etc.

  34. You may need to close them when they get too big and create Sandbox2, Guano2, etc.

    Yes, pages with lots of comments are slow loading. I think this should be a decision by Lizzie, but I do like the suggestion.

  35. I can’t see how to return it to draft.

    You can fix your anchor tags by clicking on the text tab (top right of edit box).

    What you are supposed to have done, was select the text you want to make a link, then click on the chain link (top row of icons) and fill in the boxes. But it’s probably easier now to fix in the text window.

    You could also trash it, then start over. The trash is not auto-deleted, so if you can find that you could copy-paste.

Comments are closed.