Skinwalker banning Scifes unacceptable

scott3x said:
Skinwalker wins the Palme D'or, but Stryder's past decision to autolock the 9/11 threads from Stryder simply because he disagreed with them is in the same vein.
Click to expand...
i just wanted to get this quote of yours stating skinwalker is ignorant of the scientific method.
he might have both eyes on the same pair of tits but that doesn't make him ignorant of the scientific method.

my honest opinion? you should be banned for making such a ridiculous statement.
There's also the issue of certain threads containing views (or perceived views) concerning sexuality being locked up as well.
Click to expand...
i feel the mod team made a correct assessment.
i believe asgaurd concurs.
 
leopold99 said:
scott3x said:
Skinwalker wins the Palme D'or, but Stryder's past decision to autolock the 9/11 threads from Stryder simply because he disagreed with them is in the same vein.
Click to expand...

i just wanted to get this quote of yours stating skinwalker is ignorant of the scientific method.
Click to expand...

I never mentioned Skinwalker, only moderators. Anyway, at the risk of being banned for quoting a bit from a deleted post, here it is:
"the problem is that too few people truly understand the scientific method (I include moderators here); if you don't properly understand science, you can easily believe that something pseudoscientific is scientific and vice versa."

Scary huh? :rolleyes:


he might have both eyes on the same pair of tits but that doesn't make him ignorant of the scientific method.
Click to expand...

His carefree banning of people who disagree with him doesn't look good; one might be led to believe that he cares much less for testing hypothesis then simply throwing out the ones he disagrees with.

leopold99 said:
my honest opinion? you should be banned for making such a ridiculous statement.
Click to expand...

Ah, well, that explains a lot. I can easily imagine that you'd win the Palme D'or of worst moderator if only you were given the chance :p.


leopold99 said:
scott3x said:
There's also the issue of certain threads containing views (or perceived views) concerning sexuality being locked up as well.
Click to expand...

i feel the mod team made a correct assessment.
i believe asguard concurs.
Click to expand...

I suppose that settles that then eh? :rolleyes:
 
scott3x said:
"the problem is that too few people truly understand the scientific method (I include moderators here); if you don't properly understand science, you can easily believe that something pseudoscientific is scientific and vice versa."

Scary huh? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

There isn't anything scary about your quote. It is only the truth.

I think a dyed-in-the-wool atheist as moderator of a religion subforum is as fraught with bias as a religious fundie as moderator of an evolution subforum. Well, maybe not quite that bad...:eek:
 
Giambattista said:
There isn't anything scary about your quote. It is only the truth.

I think a dyed-in-the-wool atheist as moderator of a religion subforum is as fraught with bias as a religious fundie as moderator of an evolution subforum. Well, maybe not quite that bad...:eek:
Click to expand...

The following rules and guidelines for posting in the Religion forum exist to create and maintain a high standard of interesting and informative debate on the topic of Religion where it intersects science with regard to policy, progress and cultural development as well as the examination of Religion from a scientific standpoint as with the fields of sociology, anthropology, psychology and neurology. Such discussion is expected to be done whilst abiding by relevant laws and general standards of civility and common sense. These guidelines are informed by the desire to create an atmosphere of respect for the different opinions of the many posters to this forum.
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=34473
 
Scott said:
His carefree banning of people who disagree with him doesn't look good; one might be led to believe that he cares much less for testing hypothesis then simply throwing out the ones he disagrees with.
Click to expand...

He made a rather untruthful accusation against me once because I was on the wrong side of an argument on ufos. It isn't such a stretch for me to believe that same person as moderator might be unfairly banning and deleting posts.
 
Giambattista said:
There isn't anything scary about your quote. It is only the truth.

I think a dyed-in-the-wool atheist as moderator of a religion subforum is as fraught with bias as a religious fundie as moderator of an evolution subforum. Well, maybe not quite that bad...:eek:
Click to expand...

He's not speaking of religion nor the religious when he says "if you don't properly understand science, you can easily believe that something pseudoscientific is scientific and vice versa."
 
Last edited:
Repo Man said:
The following rules and guidelines for posting in the Religion forum exist to create and maintain a high standard of interesting and informative debate on the topic of Religion where it intersects science with regard to policy, progress and cultural development as well as the examination of Religion from a scientific standpoint as with the fields of sociology, anthropology, psychology and neurology. Such discussion is expected to be done whilst abiding by relevant laws and general standards of civility and common sense. These guidelines are informed by the desire to create an atmosphere of respect for the different opinions of the many posters to this forum.
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=34473
Click to expand...

He never applies these standards to atheists. NEVER.
 
Repo Man said:
The following rules and guidelines for posting in the Religion forum exist to create and maintain a high standard of interesting and informative debate on the topic of Religion where it intersects science with regard to policy, progress and cultural development as well as the examination of Religion from a scientific standpoint as with the fields of sociology, anthropology, psychology and neurology. Such discussion is expected to be done whilst abiding by relevant laws and general standards of civility and common sense. These guidelines are informed by the desire to create an atmosphere of respect for the different opinions of the many posters to this forum.
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=34473
Click to expand...

You make a valid point.
However, to think that a topic about religion could and should be restricted to a cold, 3rd person, scientific analysis is a little unreasonable. Further, religion is within the Philosophy section. Philosophy generally dictates to science, not the other way around. While I understand that religion and philosophy are not necessarily the same thing, they overlap so much that to expect a discussion of either to stay within in the confines of "logic" or scientific reasoning (whatever defintion you care to choose) is unrealistic.

And that doesn't change the fact that an atheist moderating discussions about religion can't be trusted to be either fair or scientific.
 
A complete 'whine fest'. Skinwalker gave me an infraction once for an off-topic post where he deleted some posts in a thread and then when I asked in the thread where all the posts were I got an infraction and so bloody what! The moderation here is pretty good considering the variety of nuts in the bag. Too loose they whinge too strict and then there's more whinging about too much restriction. I really think some members take this place way too seriously
 
Lucysnow said:
He's not speaking of religion nor the religious when he says "if you don't properly understand science, you can easily believe that something pseudoscientific is scientific and vice versa."
Click to expand...

I properly took the statement at face value without ascribing it to any persons or topics in particular.
You wisely deleted your reference to Scott's "obsession".:eek:
 
Giambattista said:
I think a dyed-in-the-wool atheist as moderator of a religion subforum is as fraught with bias as a religious fundie as moderator of an evolution subforum. Well, maybe not quite that bad...:eek:
Click to expand...
i used to think the same thing, until i came to the following conclusion:
we are talking about religion as a subset of philosophy on a science board.
 
Lucysnow said:
A complete 'whine fest'. Skinwalker gave me an infraction once for an off-topic post where he deleted some posts in a thread and then when I asked in the thread where all the posts were I got an infraction and so bloody what! The moderation here is pretty good considering the variety of nuts in the bag. Too loose they whinge too strict and then there's more whinging about too much restriction. I really think some members take this place way too seriously
Click to expand...

If enough people find a moderator's actions to be biased and fickle, starting a thread such as this is a good idea.

BTW I personally have no experience with him as a mod, so I have nothing to say on a personal level. I'm just commenting on other persons' remarks.
 
Giambattista said:
BTW I personally have no experience with him as a mod, so I have nothing to say on a personal level. I'm just commenting on other persons' remarks.
Click to expand...
whether you realize it or not the above quote of yours makes everything you've said about skinwalker nothing more than your embellished opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top