Split: SAM's intellectual dishonesty and poor moderation

[Tiassa]

Your credibility is running low on this one, Glaucon

Clearly you have an inept comprehension of logic.

Coming from you?

Nonetheless, a blind person on the far side of the moon couldn't fail to see that SAM has an agenda, one that will inevitably affect everything undertaken by her.

• • •​

Overall, her bias is that of an inflexible theist.
That would be apparent enough based upon a minuscule perusal of her posts.

(chortle!)

 

[glaucon]

Coming from you?

lol

Nice argument.

Now that, ladies and gentleman, was an actual fallacy.

ad hominem anyone?




Anyday pal.. anyday...

 

[Asguard]

 

[S.A.M.]

Its just plain ole dressed up religious prejudice

I don't have a problem with your moderation

I don't have a problem with theism

I just have a problem with the two together!

 

[Killjoy]

Whining of the Massively Delusional?

Wevenge of the Majowly Disappointed?

Words of Many Deceptions?

Waaah! My D@ck!

Whatever, my dears.

Won't Moderation Disappear ?

 

[Asguard]

 

[glaucon]

Its just plain ole dressed up religious prejudice
..

Please; I know you can read SAM.

As I said, if it were atheism and moderation together, I'd have the same problem.

 

[Asguard]

 

[Tiassa]

Hare-brained

Seeing as how you like them so much here's some more for you tiassa ....

Oh, dear God, is that pornography?!

Oh, dear God! It's the rabid monster space bunnies! Run for the hills! Or you'll be up to your armpits in—

AIIIIEEEEEEEEE!

• • •​

My God, Jim! Look at all these rabbits! They're multiplying like bunnies!

• • •​

Salami, salami, baloney.

• • •​

Um, maybe we'd better stop now. I get you into trouble every time I come up with one of these ... uh ... hare-brained schemes.

 

[S.A.M.]

Please; I know you can read SAM.

As I said, if it were atheism and moderation together, I'd have the same problem.

If that were true, you'd not have introduced the religious aspect.

 

[Tiassa]

More on WMD

Won't Moderation Disappear ?

Whatsa Matta Dude?

 

[Asguard]

 

[glaucon]

If that were true, you'd not have introduced the religious aspect.

Garbage.

I could have just as easily brought up a Liberal/Conservative aspect...

But I didn't.

Why?

Because I was referring to you....

Context, context.

 

[S.A.M.]

Garbage.

I could have just as easily brought up a Liberal/Conservative aspect...

But I didn't.

Why?

Because I was referring to you....

Context, context.

And clearly while referring to me, the aspect of theism was paramount.

And so while you have no problem with thiesm or atheism per se and have no problem with my moderation, clearly you are asking us to entertain your hypothetical scenarios in order to drastically modify a system with which you cannot identify an existant problem, only a possible one based on your beliefs.

In other words, you are creating the scenario you wish us to avoid. Cater to your beliefs to change moderation at sciforums.

How very ironic.

 

[Xev]

This amused the hell out of me.

 

[invert_nexus]

I have a problem with the fact that there is no explicit delineation between the role of a person as Moderator, and/or as poster (simpliciter).

What's so difficult to understand?

Moderation occurs when warnings are posted or pm'd. When threads are edited, locked, deleted.
Etc.
I.e. When moderation occurs.

Posting is when people just post their thoughts and opinions and whatnots.
Like now.
I'm not acting as a moderator here. Nor are any of the other moderators posting in here. We're all posting as posters.
In fact, we are not even mods in this forum. This forum is modded by admin and supermods only.

Sam is a bit of a religious nut. She likes to get into scraps with the anti-religious nuts (two of the most rabid have presented themselves in this thread). She does this as a poster.
I've never seen her religious leanings get in the way of her moderation.
Ever.

It's kinda strange actually. She actually seems to believe in evolution and whatnot, I think. She's obviously found a way to fit in with her religious beliefs. Perhaps she sees them as separate spheres.

But, regardless, she has never, to my knowledge, moderated poorly due to religious bias.


Would you really speak out against rabid atheists moderating? Did you ever speak out against Q's moderating? I'll say this about Q: he is a rabid atheist/debunker/nut, but I don't think it ever affected his moderating either.

 

[S.A.M.]

I'll say this about Q: he is a rabid atheist/debunker/nut, but I don't think it ever affected his moderating either

I'll second that, he keeps his rabid fits for posting as well. Exclusively. I've never seen him be unfair in his moderation, quite the reverse.

 

[glaucon]

And clearly while referring to me, the aspect of theism was paramount.

As the example in use, yes.

And so while you have no problem with thiesm or atheism...

per se

... and have no problem with my moderation,..

True.

clearly you are asking us to entertain your hypothetical scenarios in order to drastically modify a system...

Naturally.

... with which you cannot identify an existant problem, only a possible one based on your beliefs.

Correct.
Such is how improvements are made.

In other words, you are creating the scenario you wish us to avoid. Cater to your beliefs to change moderation at sciforums.

How very ironic.

I would refer you to a dictionary.
It's not ironic at all. Of course the site should adapt to the beliefs of its members. That hardly contradicts my belief that it should not do so for the beliefs of its Moderators.

 

[S.A.M.]

Of course the site should adapt to the beliefs of its members.

Which one? After all, what makes you so special?

 

[glaucon]

Which one? After all, what makes you so special?

All members.