Chap wrote: This seems to be a substantive point that deserves some comment from the mods. (I don't feel much sympathy for the other parts of her post, though.)
Again - has marg complained to mods about this kind of problem in the Celestial forum? Did you think her complaints had merit? If so, what did you do about it?
I wrote a long post focussed on ad homs, countering what he said about them, and he's not responded to it, and I doubt he has intentions of responding to it. It's on page 6 in the sticky thread with the subject heading of my particular post "discussion on ad homs" if you wish to take look and add your 2 cents there.
As far as this thread I'm just being honest, that I don't think invitations to particular MAD posters to post here implying they will be given respectful and fair treatment is a given.
marg wrote: But back to my point this is not a place even with the Celestial which is supposedly heavily modersated, where someone can express themselves guaranteed to be free from ad hominem diversionary tactics which are meant to hinder and prevent critical discussion on topic. It all depends on the mood of the mods and Shades.
This seems to be a substantive point that deserves some comment from the mods. (I don't feel much sympathy for the other parts of her post, though.)
Again - has marg complained to mods about this kind of problem in the Celestial forum? Did you think her complaints had merit? If so, what did you do about it?
Marg's concerns have been discussed ad nauseam on this thread:
The Nehor wrote:Personally, I just question my sanity.
Oh boy, what a setup. XD
Still, I seem to recall that you assured us that you've never taken drugs for anything other than perhaps pain when you were questioned on this point.
Just remember, your notion that the rest of the world is insane is probably correct. However, they are in charge.
They'd like to think so anyway. No, I've never been diagnosed with any permanent conditions (outside scoliosis).
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
And if you asked Liz what an ad hom is and what mod rules she uses to curtail them I doubt she would reply with an answer which indicated ad homs are curtailed by any consistent rule other than some choice words designated by Shades. Which is fine as long as he openly acknowledges that's the extent of what he means by "heavily moderated" instead of it's just a matter of opinion and that personal attacks he doesn't view as ad hominal, they are mere observations.
marg wrote: But back to my point this is not a place even with the Celestial which is supposedly heavily modersated, where someone can express themselves guaranteed to be free from ad hominem diversionary tactics which are meant to hinder and prevent critical discussion on topic. It all depends on the mood of the mods and Shades.
This seems to be a substantive point that deserves some comment from the mods. (I don't feel much sympathy for the other parts of her post, though.)
Read the first post at the link that liz3564 provided. That'll give you my initial comment.
Again - has marg complained to mods about this kind of problem in the Celestial forum? Did you think her complaints had merit? If so, what did you do about it?
Here is probably the best response to your last two questions.
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
I think my point has been made Shades and you've not countered it. Just as you didn't counter my post on page 6 from that thread you linked to for Chap. My post on page 6 addressed your linked post from page 3.
You have no policy in the Celestial to protect any individual from persistent harassment. Your mod board policy seems to be to limit a few choice words out of Celestial, and you've stopped your absurd policy of moving threads based on one trouble maker which never did anything to curtail ad homs in the first place. Their ad homs are still not being curtailed by your policy, and if more people jump in to attack I believe the policy you have in place is to move the thread to a lower level where attacks are legitimately sanctioned the same policy you had previously in place.
So no individual can expect to come to this board and be protected from harrassment via moderation as per your current polices applicable to all, if that were to evolve in the Celestial.
bcspace wrote: I found that my evolution reconciliation theory can take the heat.
And by that you could only mean that you are able to to keep repeating the theory and demanding that someone show you where it is wrong after others have repeatedly and decisively done just that.
On this issue, you are like the Black Night who still wants to fight King Arthur even after having lost both legs and arms in that scene from The Holy Grail:
Evolution is true and your theory of reconciliation is not.
when believers want to give their claims more weight, they dress these claims up in scientific terms. When believers want to belittle atheism or secular humanism, they call it a "religion". -Beastie
yesterday's Mormon doctrine is today's Mormon folklore.-Buffalo
marg wrote:So no individual can expect to come to this board and be protected from harrassment via moderation as per your current polices applicable to all, if that were to evolve in the Celestial.
NOPE. And that's how it's going to be. Inperfect true but everyone else seems happy so maybe we should just cater to the 99% who can live with this board without bitching every 20 seconds about something.
(by the way: You're the 1%).
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07