News you won't see in controlled mainstream media.

Positive Changes: Better Quality

In order to enhance the quality of the discussions in the forum, it will now be moderated. There will also be a new set of posting rules specifically for this area.

I sincerely believe that this new structure will help us to have discussions of higher quality while avoiding the pitfalls that often occur in heated debate.

Why An Archive?

All old threads and posts will remain in the archive and will be accessible to anyone who wants to use them as a reference in the future. You can also continue a previous conversation in the new forum.

To continue a conversation, you can:

(1) Copy and paste the last post from the archive, or

(2) You can ask the moderator if he would be willing to move the thread to the new forum.

I chose to take this approach to cleaning up the evolution forum because I didn't want to lose any information or posts that people had made in the past. In order to respect those who have put time and effort into writing this information, this information in the archive shall remain.

On the other hand, the new set of stricter conduct rules would prohibit a lot of the negativity that exists in the archive, and out of respect for participants of the past, I didn't want the new set of rules to cause the removal of information that existed before the rules were put in place.

I hope this makes sense and I do hope the new rules and better moderation will improve the quality of the information that is present here. I have no doubt that these changes will create a much better experience for all, and will be the fertile ground from which excellent, educational information can spring forth.

I'm open to your feedback so please feel free to contact me if you like. Please be patient if I don't get back with you right away as I am currently attending our annual convention and am quite busy.

Believe me, I have.

Congratulation, Russ. You've probably found the best way to instantly get rid of all the evolutionists here. Looks like you've got your "creationists corner" at last. Choice of co-moderator, with no evolutionists alongside, speaks volumes. Message received.

I'll be the first to go; I've asked to be removed from the Herb Allure forums. RAZD and Linear, maybe I'll see you on Jar's Dreamcatcher forum at some point; Percy won't let me back on EvC. Jeanie, best wishes, sorry our conversation was cut short. Bex, if you're reading, you are a lovely person and your battle with your illness has been inspiring. Mordred, I was really intrigued by your posts and I'm sorry we won't be able to talk further. It's been real guys.

Linda,

If you want to leave, that's your decision, but know that no one is asking you to leave, so no conversations are being cut short, unless you choose to do so. None.

In your post to ikster, you've simply made presuppositions about how he will moderate, but you have never seen him moderate, so how can you make such a rash decision?

Of course, this is what I've seen evolutionists do all the time. They presuppose without observation.

The truth is, I discovered that he has a long history of administering other successful evc systems. He has a lot of experience in this area. I even reviewed his moderation on another system. Furthermore, I also obtained a personal referenced for him.

I did all these things before making this decision.

With what I've learned through my research about him, I believe he will be a fair and reasonable moderator. He will be more demanding than I have been in terms of keeping conversations on track, but I view that as a good thing.

His behavior that you witnessed over the past week was an intentional, planned demonstration. It was not representative of his true nature.

See what a little research does

Update...

I have reverted back from having an archive to moving back to the traditional model. I believe this will keep things simpler and will also allow existing links into the system (i.e.: The Forums Extras System) to continue working, and this is very important.

Since I respect the value of work and effort that people put into posts, I have asked that no exist posts be removed from the system as the moderation process,

-- HOWEVER --

ikster7959 is now moderating and has the ability to remove posts that violate the new rules, which will be posted shortly. He also has the power (or soon will) to ban users.

In short, the new rules will ensure quality conversation by attempting to remove emotionalistic remarks and other material that is not appropriate for the exploration of the subject being discussed.

This moderator has a long history of working with forum moderation and is planning on being pretty strict with the new rules in an effort to help this forum produce quality information.

In the interim, before the rules are posted, please be aware that we believe that most good conduct is common sense, so we still expect quality content absent hurtful or emotional intent.

I believe this is a great change and will finally allow us to move forward in a way that we can all gain something from.

Feel free to contact me with your comments or suggestions.

Please know that the moderator is strict with pointless complaints publicly posted on the forum. If you want to gripe, then contact the mod or myself privately.

Linda has probably seen his moderation technique on the Evolution Fairy Tale forum. I am hoping that he is different here.


Is this an example of the type of post that will pass ikester's muster? I guess I could counter with:

"Of course, this is what I've seen creationists do all the time. They make assertions without any evidence."

However, I am reasonably sure that neither statement would get by without at least a moderator comment.

Looking forward to the new CvE forum!!

Hey, Russ, I have some concerns here.

What I have seen on other forums is that content can be hidden from view, but still available for review if necessary. Removal would not leave that possibility. There was also a thread open just to moderators, where they noted when any action was taken against a poster, what post, what the punishments were, etc.

I find it ironic that he quoted a portion of one of my posts that he found objectionable, and then deleted the rest, thus leaving only the (to him) objectionable material. It seems to me that a more positive approach - one to encourage positive results - would be to delete (or hide) the objectionable part and leave the rest.

After all, it does not punish me to remove all my post, but anyone who would like to read it. Leaving the legitimate questions deleted, unanswered also does no service to any other posters who would benefit from knowing the answers.

But another thing disturbs me more. Alia Atreides in post #40180 essentially said that one of our members should be killed, solely based on what he believes. I notice that Jeanie is also disturbed by this casual threat against the life of a member.

One wonders that this was/is not seen as crossing the line(s), and that all he got in response was a slap on the wrist lecture. Dare one judge the level of unbias/fairness portended by these two incidents? Does "... are they personal attacks on what I choose not to believe?" truly apply only to evolutionists?

I've waited a day to say this, so this is not some emotional over-reaction posted in the heat of anger.

Thanks for your consideration.

Enjoy.

Note: my time is limited, so I only choose threads of particular interest to me and I cannot guarantee a reply to all responses (particularly if they do not discuss the issue/s), and I expect other people to do the same. Thank you for your consideration.