To others, there is a general argument to be made for closing less discussions and deleting more or finding other ways to deal with them. That's something we'll take on board. — Baden

I think one thing that makes closures more attractive here is that it leaves a trace, and the moderation is otherwise almost totally invisible. If only we had proper Pauline software.

I think one thing that makes closures more attractive here is that it leaves a trace, and the moderation is otherwise almost totally invisible. If only we had proper Pauline software. — unenlightened

If you lend me £50,000, I promise you I'll buy back the old forum. I definitely won't blow it all on drugs, hookers, fast cars, and partying.

I definitely won't blow it all on drugs, hookers, fast cars, and partying. — S

I’ll go for one of the four.

I’ll go for one of the four. — Michael

You'll intend to go for one of the four. You've never been on a night out with me. It's all or nothing. We might end up seriously injured, off of our faces on drugs, in a crashed Ferrari with two dead hookers in the back, but you couldn't say you didn't have a good time.

Baden, I love ya... — S

Aw, I love you too. :kiss: Did you say something else ... ? Must have missed that. ;)

Guys, stop joking around or I'll close the discussion.

...according to the rules (conventional syntactical practices)
— Janus

So you use "rule" to just refer to a conventional practice?

You could have simply said that if so, no?
— Terrapin Station

:grimace:
— Janus

No idea what that would indicate.
— Terrapin Station

Asperger's then?
— Janus

It indicates that you have Asperger's? Why would you be telling me that all of a sudden instead of just answering the simple question I asked?
— Terrapin Station

You're the one with no idea what an emoticon indicates; but by all means project away, and I'll leave you to it. :yawn:
— Janus

Right, especially when it was in lieu of answering a simple question. I was looking for an answer, not a deflection.
— Terrapin Station

Sorry to be harsh, Terrapin, but it wasn't a deflection it was a rejection. I don't have the patience for persistently intellectually dishonest interlocutors.
— Janus

It was a rejection of a question?
— Terrapin Station

No, of your whole sophistry.
— Janus

That's a lot to read into two simple questions.
— Terrapin Station

I'm not taking any sides here, but I thought that this was a funny exchange, and it remained relevant enough. These kind of exchanges are almost inevitable. They're both big boys, both have a sense of humour, both have thick enough skin, both are capable of sufficiently remaining on point. If my current discussion was closed because of something like that, especially when I'm not even involved in the exchange, then I would be very annoyed at the staff responsible.

Just edit or delete if need be. And let's not overreact to a bit of banter or a cutting remark here and there or a few blunt truths.

If you lend me £50,000, I promise you I'll buy back the old forum. — S

I have the money ready for you, which I have inherited from my uncle who was the minister for exciting things in Nigeria, and is unfortunately a bit dead. I just need your bank details, and £500 to complete the probate papers, and I will be happy to transfer all the money and a £10,000 agents fee to you at once.

Fun while it lasted.

Fair to prevent further nonsense. — Baden

Surely those arguing against @S can decide there is nothing of value left? I may be missing something. Does it cost money to keep the posts? From a philosophy perspective, wouldn't it be better for the staff to add a post that says, "we (the site administrators) think the position of @S is nonsense. The argument seems to have devolved to an emotional tit-for-tat." Or maybe a "watch out. you are getting off topic".

Then those of us involved can defend ourselves against that (or correct our behavior). Also, that may encourage those who disagree with S(or me or whoever), to think, "Ok, I won. I can stop the discussion now" or they might have more to say. If so, what is the harm in continuing?

I would also note that the thread was SO active there was likely to be a bit of banter mixed in. It had over 600 posts in just a couple weeks (when closed I had four responses waiting for me).

Fun while it lasted. — Mww

Indeed. Thanks for the thoughts. While I may not have been entirely convinced as to the merits of idealism, I certainly learned a good deal about certain distinctions between realism and idealism.

Sorry I didn't bring enough knowledge to keep the thread open :grimace:

From a philosophy perspective, wouldn't it be better for the staff to add a post that says, "we (the site administrators) think the position of S is nonsense. — ZhouBoTong

Oh god, no. There'd be one of those in every discussion I involved myself in. That's already an invisible signpost which follows me around. They wouldn't recognise my good sense if it ran up to them and slapped them round the face! To them, everything I say is utter nonsense.

Okay, maybe that's a slight exaggeration. But not far off.

I would also note that the thread was SO active there was likely to be a bit of banter mixed in. It had over 600 posts in just a couple weeks (when closed I had four responses waiting for me). — ZhouBoTong

Did you hear that, @Banno? :grin:

You’re welcome. Gives me a chance to show off. No..wait...I mean....(grin)

Don’t sweat keeping the thread open; wasn’t up to us. There’ll be others.

Oh god, no. There'd be one of those in every discussion I involved myself in. That's already an invisible signpost which follows me around. They wouldn't recognise my good sense if it ran up to them and slapped them round the face! To them, everything I say is utter nonsense. — S

Haha. Fair enough. But we don't have to agree when they say you are speaking nonsense. It allows them to say the forum is regulated, but we can keep our discussion going.

Gives me a chance to show off. — Mww

haha, as long as I can learn something, call it whatever you want :smile:

Tell you what. Apply those principles of tolerance and less judgementalness to your interlocutors in future and karma may take a liking to you. — Baden

Not going to happen. :rofl:

Did you hear that, Banno? :grin: — S

Meh - I have two that are easily twice that, on this forum.

Meh - I have two that are easily twice that, on this forum. — Banno

Yeah? I bet they didn't get closed prematurely. If I didn't act like such a smartarse, it probably would've just kept going to infinity.

Nothing I do is premature.

"Nothing I do is premature!" he ejaculated before I had a chance to say a single word. :joke:

Tell you what. Apply those principles of tolerance and less judgementalness to your interlocutors in future and karma may take a liking to you.
— Baden

Not going to happen. :rofl: — Sir2u

I'll just leave this here...

I am just a humble thinker with opinions based on what I see and what I know. [ :rofl: ] It would seem to be that you are the one covering up your inabilities with pompousness.
— Sir2u

You are pretty far from being humble. You should really calm down and take a look at your own writing before judging others. The critique against you does not being until you behave in a certain way, the causality of this is pretty straight forward. You judge others all the time and you mock the knowledge they provide with inadequate reasoning and pure speculative opinions. The response you get probably reflects the writing you do more than all the other people and their knowledge. — Christoffer

:zip:

(At least I'm aware of my lack of humbleness, and openly acknowledge it with self-depreciating humour).

(At least I'm aware of my lack of humbleness, and openly acknowledge it with self-depreciating humour). — S

But you are not smart enough to come up with something to say yourself, you have to quote another of your ilk.

But you are not smart enough to come up with something to say yourself, you have to quote another of your ilk. — Sir2u

You say that I am not smart enough, but what would a chimpanzee know of the works of Shakespeare? It would be wasted on you.

I would also note that the thread was SO active there was likely to be a bit of banter mixed in. It had over 600 posts in just a couple weeks (when closed I had four responses waiting for me). — ZhouBoTong

I want "bantery" posts anyway, even if we're "strictly" doing philosophy. I prefer chatting to message board posting partially for this reason. It's the pits when people babble on and on for hundreds of words in a very unfocused. rambling manner, broaching what's essentially a couple handfuls or even tens of different issues in the process . . . and almost every single long post does that.

Hanover or Michael I would trust. — S

I didn't read your thread so can't weigh in, but if your thread contained similar insights as this^, I side against your oppressors.

I don't know why that discussion was closed but I am a Mentor over on Physics Forums and can assure anyone deciding such things is both consensus based and exceedingly difficult. Much discussion with other mentors goes into it first. I do not agree with all closures, nor do I agree with some left open. Despite being a Mentor I have had discussions started by me shut down and at first its not nice. But after a while you realize - really is it the end of the world? Nowadays I personally just shrug my shoulders and say that's just the way it is. There is always plenty of other things to discuss.

Thanks
Bill

I don't know why that discussion was closed but I am a Mentor over on Physics Forums and can assure anyone deciding such things is both consensus based and exceedingly difficult. Much discussion with other mentors goes into it first. I do not agree with all closures, nor do I agree with some left open. Despite being a Mentor I have had discussions started by me shut down and at first its not nice. But after a while you realize - really is it the end of the world? Nowadays I personally just shrug my shoulders and say that's just the way it is. There is always plenty of other things to discuss.

Thanks
Bill — Bill Hobba

This is kind of funny, because I already said that it's not the end of the world, in those exact words. And I know how it works here from a staff perspective better than most, because I am a former staff member. But the Feedback forum is here for a good reason. I'm not just complaining for the sake of complaining, I'm being constructive about it. I don't think that the attitude of shrugging your shoulders and saying that that's just the way that it is is a great attitude to have if you actually care about the forum and what can be done to improve it. It's especially not a good attitude for a member of staff to have. That there are plenty of other things to discuss is beside the point.

I'll shrug my shoulders and move on after I've given my feedback and made my case, which I have done. And others have had a decent opportunity to give their input.

I would be okay with this discussion being closed now for that reason, although I doubt whether that's really necessary. And if it's not necessary, then why do it? What's the loss? Feedback should be more open and ongoing, unless and until it gets too disruptive or chaotic.

I'll shrug my shoulders and move on after I've given my feedback and made my case


Don't worry If I do not agree my 'feedback' is given in spades. The point is beyond that you are better off just moving on. And it is a hard often thankless job. I cant recall the number of private emails I have had about shut down threads. I may or may not agree with it, but explaining a group decision to a sometimes angry 'member' tests my virtually non existent diplomacy skills to its limit. Just another highlight of that 'wonderful' job of Mentor. Seriously like all tasks it has good and bad aspects - obviously for me the good outweighs the bad.

Thanks
Bill

I got forcibly removed from the role of moderator by the owner of this forum because he judged that I was being too honest, and I didn't change my behaviour accordingly. It was akin to being fired for straightforwardly telling a stupid customer why they're being stupid, only here, in my evaluation, we're supposed to be better than such a superficial way of looking at a situation like that. But if the owner wants superficiality from the staff, and he's going to enforce that principle, then so be it. I'll just have to deal with that, but I'll deal with that in my own way. And I did.

Apparently telling people how it is pisses them off, and that they get pissed off is my fault for not sugarcoating the truth, instead of their fault for not being a man about it. Apparently this looks bad. Apparently it's supposed to be style over substance in their world, thus sayeth the lord, or something tantamount to that anyway. He probably wouldn't put it quite like that. Apparently I'm supposed to care a great deal more about etiquette than I do.

These were given as examples of my "sophistry" in the message notifying me that I had been removed:

"Yep. That's the cold hard truth."

"Exactly. If you have faith, then you fall for it, and if you don't, then you don't fall for it."

"It would be a fact if God existed, and if God did so, but God doesn't, so God can't."

It's a joke, right? I'm much better off not being pressured into pussyfooting around, being too afraid to say boo to a goose for fear of what the boss might do. (My former boss also happens to be biased against New Atheists, and thought of me as he thinks of them, but I'm sure that that had nothing to do with it).

The whole saga was like expecting Diogenes to be "diplomatic" with Alexander the Great. But, of course, had he been so, instead of just telling him to step aside from blocking the sun, then Alexander wouldn't have respected him half as much, and there wouldn't have been an anecdote worth bringing up. Better to drink the hemlock, like Socrates.

Diogenes and Socrates now? I thought you were Winston from 1984? Who next? Wonderwoman?

Diogenes and Socrates now? I thought you were Winston from 1984? Who next? Wonderwoman? — Baden

I'm all of them and more. In short, I am God. In fact, God pales in comparison to me. I'm like God, but much better. Perfect in fact. No, wait, I'm better than perfect. Like, perfect, but more perfect. No, the most perfect. Greater than which no other being can be conceived.

Now step aside, you're blocking my glorious rays of brilliance.

Just dropping in one more glorious refutation of Badens hilariously presumptuous guess about who wouldnt side with S.
Even if Baden were in the right, it would still be a dangerous (in the context of the battleground of ideas), authoritarian operating procedere. Its pretty obvious to me that the kind of dismissive, heavy hand is at play here. Imo, Baden IS in the wrong, it is clearly about his personal feelings. He shut downna discussion he didnt care for. The charge of bias standa as far as I can tell.