SAM as Moderator and Representative

Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by (Q), Mar 24, 2008.

?

What do you think of SAMS ability to moderate and represent Sciforums?

Poll closed Mar 27, 2008.
  1. I think SAM moderates fairly and is intellectually honest.

    1 vote(s)
    5.3%
  2. I think SAM moderates fairly but is intellectually dishonest.

    7 vote(s)
    36.8%
  3. I think SAM does not moderate fairly but is intellectually honest.

    2 vote(s)
    10.5%
  4. I think SAM does not moderate fairly and is intellectually dishonest.

    9 vote(s)
    47.4%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    Well then i'm a surgeon.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    Thats true. Lets love SAM, in spite of ALL her problems.
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    Eh? Sam misrepresents atheism at every opportunity. Sam tries to attribute things to atheism that she just can't make stick, and then keeps re-iterating her falsehoods, even after her misconceptions are explained to her; that is the crux of her dishonesty.
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. shichimenshyo Caught in the machine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,110
    this is true
     
  8. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    I think she is a fine moderator, but argues like an ADHD kid hopped up on Pixy Sticks.
     
  9. Exhumed Self ******. Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,373
    Could you give a specific example? I looked in most of the thread and did not see this.
     
  10. greenberg until the end of the world Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,811
    I disagree.

    She vehemently questions the philosophy of objectivism and realism which is typical for militant atheists and traditional 19th century (and earlier) scientists.

    It is a controversial act. Non-religious constructivists and relativists also question the philosophy of objectivism and realism, in somewhat similar manner. Although this second debate isn't so obvious at this forum, but it does take place as well.

    A true scientist would not consider someone who believes in God to be "delusional".

    I am afraid many who call themselves atheists and scientists do not realize how little they have left to say once they declare themselves as atheists and scientists.
     
  11. shichimenshyo Caught in the machine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,110
    What about the atributing the mass genocide that occured under Stalin to atheism?
     
  12. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    I have to agree. I think SAM has problems, but she did a good job in those threads she made ridiculing Atheism\Atheist. Perhaps this is the inevitable fallout. She did everything but show that Hitler himself was an Atheist.
     
  13. greenberg until the end of the world Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,811
    I'm under the impression that she sometimes tries to accomplish something else than mere discussion. She seems to be in for debate.

    The way she discusses, especially when there is a lot of zig-zagging, strikes me as a kind of psychological manipulation, an indirect way to get the opponent consider things they are unwilling to consider if confronted about them directly.
     
  14. shichimenshyo Caught in the machine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,110
    But just because hilter was an atheists does not mean that the holocaust was in the name of atheism.
     
  15. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    Hitler's psychological profile:

    His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.
     
  16. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    OMG. That describes SAM.

    :runaway:
     
  17. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    of course not.
     
  18. greenberg until the end of the world Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,811
    I intuitively consider this to be a strawman. But I find myself hardpressed to show why exactly this is a strawman.

    I think a careful use of strawmen and other fallacies can be an efficient debate tactic when the debate already is taking place unfairly. Skilled debaters sometimes deliberately use fallacies when the opponent keeps presenting them with fallacies.

    Someone who uses a fallacy against you plays unfairly. You can either try to reason with them, give up, give in, or fight.
     
  19. shichimenshyo Caught in the machine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,110
    I dont think that in the realm of the thesim Vs. atheism reason is even possible.
     
  20. Exhumed Self ******. Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,373
    Surely you don't actually think she did that. :bugeye:

    She was making a point that a absence of religion does not make the world better, at least in terms of violence? That violence is a human, not a religious thing?
     
  21. shichimenshyo Caught in the machine Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,110
    :shrug:
     
  22. Exhumed Self ******. Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,373
  23. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,083
    She's got a point.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page