Remove EvidenceVsFaith

[Edwardo Piet]

That's find if that's your opinion. I'll just say if there are other 'fluff posters' too - they will still have a lot less than me of course, simply because I have so many posts.

I have a lot of non-'fluff posts' too. I hope you'd agree.

I generally only fluff post when I'm responding to other fluff posts....I generally try not to start them.

If I ever do start them - I apologize, I'll try not to.

I mean the Off-topic forum is more for that, for instance.

EvF

[Eilonnwy]

Just because other people fluff post doesn't mean you should continue it. I would agree that off-topic is a place where fluffing doesn't bother me because of it's intent.

At the end of the day, yes, you don't only contribute fluff but you should try to avoid instances where you do. And as a moderator you should discourage others from doing it as well.

[Samson]

I have a forum of my own and have owned a few in the past. One thing that is for sure is needing active members to keep it alive. Regardless who, where or what EvF is an active member here and does contribute at keeping this forum going.

I have zero issues with his posts and not that my opinion matters, but for someone to come onto a forum (any forum) and their first post is to slap the hand of the moderator.....well.....the first button in the admin console I would push would be the remove/ban one of that poster.

Just my 2 cents...

[Tiberius]

Bef is a good friend of mine, and the only reason I told him to post his complaint on the forum was because it was useless him complaining to me. This isn't a dictatorship, I'm not going to remove EvF solely on the basis that one friend doesn't like the way he posts.

Hence why I wanted people to read Bef's thoughts for themselves. I happen to agree with Bef's point concerning a lot of EvF's posts; they do just seem like a load of random thoughts hurled together without any regard for structure. It's like there is a megaphone attached directly to his thoughts, and whilst thoughts are very important in forums, they need to be structured instead of just written down as they come.

Now I know EvF can change; I got sick of him using capital letters to EMPHASIZE seemingly random things so I PM'ed him about it, and now he uses bold text which is an improvement, although I don't think it is really necessary to do (hence why I only do it on occasion for really important things).

I guess the reason why I was concerned is that a prospective member came here and didn't like how a member of staff was presenting himself, especially considering this forum is meant to be about serious discussion (unlike say, AtheistForums.com presents itself). The last thing I want is people not joining this forum because a staff member and the person with the largest number of posts (over 1000 more than the next highest poster...me) is posting in a way in which people disagree. I hadn't heard of the term before now, but apparently it is "fluffing".

[Eilonnwy]

Adrian, it's always good to make sure people hear criticisms to those who need to. I would just say that the method of doing it wasn't the best, considering this forums propensity to attack first time posters if they do something discouraged by the rules, like spam or preach. In some cases it might be warranted, but in general it reflects badly on us. So Bef's message was lost in a storm of "Who the hell are you to say something like this?" Which is unfair to both Bef and EvF in my opinion.

[Edwardo Piet]

@ Adrian

Adrian, if you yourself really do take issue with the way I write, and see it as a problem - you can just tell me. Well I know you have told me (as some others have, like Kyu has, for example) that, as you say here too - I need to structure my thoughts more. I know this, I have trouble doing this. I try my best, but it's hard to do it without getting complete writers block (as I believe I've told you before on MSN) and either not contributing anything at all or simply posting 1 sentence posts that hardly say anything and don't really make a point (or get only get half of what I want said, said).

If, then, it's not really an issue but merely what you and others (Like Kyu) have told me before, then I do think Bef's opinion is quite obviously and absurd overreaction (especially considering he doesn't even post here) because - I do not see how simply my own difficulty in structuring my thoughts, or simply 'the way I post' deserves a ban! I mean, lol - and what rule is it breaking exactly? The rule of 'don't be like EvF because it annoys me'?

And if there is a reason to ban me (???), whatever that would be - I haven't really changed my ways (overall) for the 9 months I've been here...so why take issue now?

How could I be banned (and on what grounds?) for my behavior of the whole 9 months I've been here...9 months after my joining? I mean - that seems kind of messed up?

EvF

[Eilonnwy]

He didn't asked you to be banned, but to not be a moderator.

Do you read a lot? Because if you have trouble with sentence structuring, reading more books can be one solution to learning better writing habits.

[Edwardo Piet]

Yeah quite right, he didn't say that I just wonder what him saying that I should also be 'reprimanded for my behavior' would involve lol (For my behavior? I haven't broken any rules lol).

On the matter of books: I don't really read fiction...hardly have anyway. I have mostly just read shit loads of self help books in the past, TGD (and I am currently on The Blind Watchmaker), and some comedy books such as the 'Fry and Laurie' scripts and Rik Mayall's book 'The Rik Mayall, Bigger than Hitler better than Christ'.

The vast vast majority of what I read is on the internet (because I'm like, always using computers basically lol).

If I was on my computer less I'd be reading 'books' a lot more - I'd be spending a lot of my time doing that.

Atm I'm very slowly reading the Blind Watchmaker. I read TGD in a day or two (then I read small bits of it many times every day for several months) because that was just before I got this computer lol.

EvF

EDIT: Furthermore, as I have said - there's bound to be more 'fluff posts' simply because I have so many posts. But I'd say there are a vast quantiy of my posts that are big posts, and a lot of it tends to be arguing with someone such as fr0d0, or earlier, Daystar, etc, etc.

I do some very big posts too, you may have noticed. When someone has almost 3000 posts it's easier to find more 'fluff posts' simply because there are more posts!

And I believe that my posts are basically always on topic...except when I'm replying to something off-topic because the thread has already died or whatever. Topics tend to drift very often - but I always try to stay on-topic and believe I only reply off-topic when it's already drifted too much anyway.

A lot of my 'lol posts' are in response to comments that are as much as 'fluff post' themselves. It still conveys a point rather than ignoring, and it doesn't drift the topic any more than it already has by the previous 'fluff post'.

If someone posts an argument I will respond to it (and my response is often comparatively large...not exactly an "lol" post) - and I doubt you'll see me respond to an argument or something on-topic with a 'fluff post'. If you actually do - I apologise!

I reply to a post, a comment - with what I think is valid to it.

I don't reply to non-serious posts with serious posts if there isn't something serious to contribute. But then I don't respond to serious posts and discussions with 'fluff posts' or 'lols' I think you'll find. I believe I do what is valid and appropriate to the thread and/or the posts in there..?

That's my opinion anyway.

EvF

[Samson]

I personally believe this topic should be locked now and tossed...

[Bef]

Let me see how well I can illustrate a point using two of your posts in this thread

I'll just say if there are other 'fluff posters' too - they will still have a lot less than me of course, simply because I have so many posts.

there's bound to be more 'fluff posts' simply because I have so many posts.

When someone has almost 3000 posts it's easier to find more 'fluff posts' simply because there are more posts!

Not only have you stated this opinion three times in two posts regardless of the fact that nobody has responded to it, you've also gone about doing so with no regard for logic. It does not follow logically that because someone has more posts they'll have a higher percentage off spam and nonsense.

I generally only fluff post when I'm responding to other fluff posts....I generally try not to start them.

And I believe that my posts are basically always on topic...except when I'm replying to something off-topic because the thread has already died or whatever.

I only reply off-topic when it's already drifted too much anyway.

A lot of my 'lol posts' are in response to comments that are as much as 'fluff post' themselves. It still conveys a point rather than ignoring, and it doesn't drift the topic any more than it already has by the previous 'fluff post'.

Not only have you made this point four times in two posts, you've once again failed to recognise the point. It does not reflect well on the community if you are spamming useless crap in threads, and a moderator certainly should absolutely never be contributing to the derailing of a thread. This is a prime example of why you should not be assisting in the administration of this forum. You adopt a "I'm not the only one doing it" attitude, which once again misses the point - you're supposed to have risen above such poor behaviour, you are a representative of this forum and visitors to the board (myself included) will respond very negatively to seeing such a free-flowing stream of crap pouring from a super moderators mouth.

I could go on, but I think the point has been well demonstrated.