Well folks, it's been fun.

But when posts that try to clarify the issue, especially to someone who is clearly a student and could use some pointers, are summarily deleted, then I've had enough. spidergoat has wiped out almost an entire page of posts in a philosophy thread.

The level of censorship and "editing" has now become intolerable. I'm afraid to post even rational arguments now lest they be considered slightly off topic and erased. Stick robotically to the point or be erased. I can already find lots off forums like that.

If anyone has any other good forums they'd like to recommend, I'll still check any PM's for a while.

Good luck.

Another one bites the dust?

To be fair he only did it in that one thread, to make a point I guess.

Well folks, it's been fun.

But when posts that try to clarify the issue, especially to someone who is clearly a student and could use some pointers, are summarily deleted, then I've had enough. spidergoat has wiped out almost an entire page of posts in a philosophy thread.

The level of censorship and "editing" has now become intolerable. I'm afraid to post even rational arguments now lest they be considered slightly off topic and erased. Stick robotically to the point or be erased. I can already find lots off forums like that.

If anyone has any other good forums they'd like to recommend, I'll still check any PM's for a while.

Good luck.

Ah man, all the cool people are getting popped in the balls.

A point? A demonstration that attempting clarification or addressing a side issue that is relevant to a discussion will be deleted?

Fuck that fucking shit.

Hmm.
That seems to be a very strange thread.
Spidergoat seems to be a convert to the Rokkon Rules of Decorum?
I suppose he's trying to keep the thread true to the op's original intent and stand strong behind the rules posted in the opening thread?
I strongly dislike the idea of such wholescale deletion, however.

Some questions:

Has spidergoat also done this type of thing in other threads or just this one thread?

Do you disagree with the stated reasons behind the post deletions?

Do you disagree with the validity of the rules given in the opening post?

Ah man, all the cool people are getting popped in the balls.
Hey planckster. I guess the only real point of doing anything here is to waste your time typing.

Well the point I guess is that such rules (Rokkons' that is) won't get the discussion anywhere.

GOD DAMNIT TO HELL!!! SOMEONE NEEDS TO REDIRECT ME TO THE NOTES ADDED TO THE OP WHEN WE'RE ON PAGE TWO AND I DON'T LOOK AT THE OP ANYMORE!!!

BEFORE I MAKE A TOTAL ASSHAT OUT OF MYSELF!!! FUCK!!!!

Moderator's Note: I will attempt to satisfy Rokkon's Rules. Normal rules of moderation will be replaced by Rokkon's Rules for this thread only. Please post here only if you are willing to accept these rules. Thank you.

Moderator's Note: I will attempt to satisfy Rokkon's Rules. Normal rules of moderation will be replaced by Rokkon's Rules for this thread only. Please post here only if you are willing to accept these rules. Thank you.

Spidergoat has made a statement in the opening post. A bit belated, I suppose:

Moderator's Note: I will attempt to satisfy Rokkon's Rules. Normal rules of moderation will be replaced by Rokkon's Rules for this thread only. Please post here only if you are willing to accept these rules. Thank you.

So that explains it.

It is tough, I know, to have posts deleted like that. You've put time and effort into your replies and they are just summarily deleted. With a retroactive contract included in the opening post to explain why.
But, perhaps you can let Spidergoat just do his thing with this thread?

It's not like he's doing this everywhere, right?


Well the point I guess is that such rules (Rokkons' that is) won't get the discussion anywhere.

Perhaps a metathread discussing the rules are in order then and a new thread could be created with new rules?


BEFORE I MAKE A TOTAL ASSHAT OUT OF MYSELF!!! FUCK!!!!

Heh.
He didn't post that until after you'd already reacted. He only posted it moments ago.
He should have posted it before he edited the thread.
Live and learn.

I had no idea that note was added when my posts started getting deleted! State any rules you want, who cares? Just, for fuck sake, warn a fellow, ok?

welcome back!

We missed you, buddy. Did you bring us anything?
What's it like out there?

We missed you, buddy. Did you bring us anything?
What's it like out there?
Thanks everyone. Cold. Frightening. It's a freakin' mess out there. Raping, pillaging, interspecies sex, bingo nights... ugh.

Well, now that my blood pressure's down I need a drink.

I think if this Regime continues there will only be compliant introverts left here. Quality of posts should be placed over strict rules in a good forum.

bingo nights...
:eek: Is there no goodness in their souls?

http://images.webz.cz/img/crucifix.jpg

I apologize for my editing of Rokkon's thread without warning. I have since made it a sticky and added an explanation at the top.

I think it's a good idea, Spidergoat.

Thank you. If members tend to find this overly intrusive, I won't do it again.

Guys, we can't simply start bending the forum rules by allowing posters to post their own rules for each thread. If we do, we set precedent. And if I'm not mistaken, only the admins can do that.

I don't see how this is setting a precedent for anything other than creative ways to stir up discussion.

No rules are being broken or even bent.

I think this is a neat idea and I'd like to see how it goes.
I think that more thread could be created in a similar vein and this might even prompt discussion on formal rules for these formal threads.
None of these rules will be carried over to the forum in general as the forums at large are not so formal as a thread such as this would be.

And, mods are free to enforce their demesnes as they see fit.
Spurious has already raised the bar on certain types of discussion in his forum and the admins have only supported his decision to do so.

It's not like Spidergoat is going on a mad deleting spree in every thread in his forum.
He's made one single thread into an experimental formal environment.


Now. I do see some issues with the rules given. They are subject to some subjectivity.
Perhaps better rules could be hashed out by those who wish to be involved in such an enterprise?


by allowing posters to post their own rules for each thread.

I do agree here.
This is not setting precedent for such a thing, however. It is merely being done at the whim of a moderator.
Whimsy.
Such has already a strong precedent for moderator action here.

Posters can go ahead and post all the rules they like in their threads, but if not sanctioned by a mod in each case, then the rules are nothing but words.

I should think that no more than one or maybe a few such formal threads should be active at any time.
Especially considering that these threads would require massive investment of time by the moderator (assuming poster interst, that is.)

I don't see how this is setting a precedent for anything other than creative ways to stir up discussion.

Uh, are you blind? You set precedent by allowing a poster to set their own rules for their threads. Then, everyone does it and you have no more control. It's a pretty simple concept.

I know this has been suggested before, but what about a formal debate/scientific analysis forum where the standard rules of debate and scientific rigor are observed? I imagine that only the brave would post there, and they'd be pretty lonely at that...

But then people who want to really, really focus on the topic at hand would have a place to go, eh?

Q,

Your argument is quite flawed.
You start out wrong and then keep going more wrong.

You set precedent by allowing a poster to set their own rules for their threads.

This precedent has not been set.
The whim of a moderator has decided that it might be interesting to try a single thread with a strict system of rules.

This is not allowing a user to set their own rules for their threads (plural.)

Then, everyone does it and you have no more control.

This is just completely off base.
Everyone can start putting rules in every thread they create, this doesn't mean that those rules will be followed.

The keywords of the day are "moderator whim".

It's a pretty simple concept.

You'd think so, wouldn't you?


Supe,

I know this has been suggested before, but what about a formal debate/scientific analysis forum where the standard rules of debate and scientific rigor are observed?

Why not?
As I've said, I think the rules in the thread are a bit subjective. Better rules could be hashed out. I imagine there are a set of rules for organized debate, but that's not to say that these rules need all be incorporated into any thread.

In a way, the hashing out of rules before the thread even begins is an added element to the competition. Competing for advantage even before the discussion begins.

I imagine that only the brave would post there, and they'd be pretty lonely at that...

Yeah. Probably so. But one never knows.

invert,

As I mentioned in the thread itself, the poster's requirements are vacuous. A simple analogue is if I demanded not to be cross examined on phrasings which are 'evidently obvious to anyone'. I am not saying there has to be a set of guidelines governing how such threads should be set up but this guy is a more on for posting in a philosophy forum and demanding that we should not ask him what he means by the empty phrase "time flows" especially when he goes on to admit that time does not flow.

Also some laxness should be given. Maybe italicizing the post to show it does not follow the rules or something. Don't just delete them as if they are 'useless' (as the goat has apparently done). Perhaps they may be useless to the poster but not to everyone else. If all of us are incapable of following the general rules to a T then I'm sure this new stringent approach (apparently taken by the goat) is going to stifle things. Besides, think of it on a global scale. That's a lot of work to do for whatever poor chap runs Politics or Free Thoughts..

*shiver* I remember getting banned by Goofy for saying 'more on' back in the day..

§outh§tar:

invert,

As I mentioned in the thread itself, the poster's requirements are vacuous
Let's see if we can demonstrate that.

1. Please try to post what flaws you find without anything provocative or competitive (I once tried to kill myself with a pencil due to a loss in a small competition in 8th grade social studies).
Ok. He's a sensitive guy. No problem there.

2. Remember that this is a search for flaws in the theory itself, not with the presentation (for example, do not comment on the things that simply could have been worded better for its only improvement. Things such as when I say "time's flow" or similar things when we all know that time doesn't actually "flow" at all, or when I say "outside of time" when we all know that time is not a spatial thing, and thus things cannot literally be inside or outside of time. In other words, don't be too literal.)
I read this as "I think things like time "flowing" or being "outside of time" are just lazy ways of expressing myself, but they're central to my theory, so don't mention those things or I'll smack you."

3. Take great care not to change the subject; many times people have done this in my discussions, and the results were not pretty.
Fair enough.

4. Read VERY carefully; to say that I said something that I didn't say or to misinterpret what I say would be to waste time for both of us.
Well, if we're not allowed to interpret your statements, and then have those "misinterpretations" corrected by you, why would you post anything in the first place unless you were just childishly looking for some kind of ego validation?

I think this rule should be made an official sciforums rule.

"Misinterpretations of a posters writings will not be tolerated and wiil result in an instant three day ban due to the misinterpreter being a moron in the first place."

There. That should just about 100% depopulate the forum starting... NOW.

...
Also some laxness should be given. Maybe italicizing the post to show it does not follow the rules or something. Don't just delete them as if they are 'useless' (as the goat has apparently done). Perhaps they may be useless to the poster but not to everyone else. If all of us are incapable of following the general rules to a T then I'm sure this new stringent approach (apparently taken by the goat) is going to stifle things. Besides, think of it on a global scale. That's a lot of work to do for whatever poor chap runs Politics or Free Thoughts..

*shiver* I remember getting banned by Goofy for saying 'more on' back in the day..
OK, point taken.

Your argument is quite flawed.
You start out wrong and then keep going more wrong.

It only appears wrong from someone who doesn't get it.

This precedent has not been set.
The whim of a moderator has decided that it might be interesting to try a single thread with a strict system of rules.

Please note the bold and try hard to understand what it is you wrote and then try to follow it through using a bit of logic to its obvious conclusion.

This is not allowing a user to set their own rules for their threads (plural.)

Yes, it does.

This is just completely off base.
Everyone can start putting rules in every thread they create, this doesn't mean that those rules will be followed.

You should ask yourself why not.

The keywords of the day are "moderator whim".

Exactly. Are you beginning to get it?

You should ask yourself why not.


Because of that thing you put in bold.