Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

14646Re: MODERATOR The End of CED

Expand Messages
  • Stephen E. Jones
    Jul 21, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Group

      From: John Distazo <John.Distazo@...>
      Date: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:19 pm
      Subject: The End of CED

      JD>Ah, the end of CED. Well, I won't hate to see it go, nor
      >miss it much. It's been infamous for years as the home of
      >Steve "the Control Freak" Jones, who has played big fish
      >(or Ichthus, if you will) in the small, scummy pond of
      >creationism. I have to admit I've seen a lot of good debate
      >here, but none of it coming from Steve or his minions,
      >who've all seen fit to flout his rules as Steve winks and
      >turns a blind eye to it while muzzling his opponents at the
      >drop of his moderator's hat. [...]

      *** Moderator: Actually I had been expecting something like
      this from John, and to be consistent I have now removed his
      posting privileges on CED.

      John's post is its own refutation. If I `muzzle my
      opponents at the drop of my moderator's hat', then how has
      John been able to remain unmoderated on CED for so long?
      The answer is that John has not broken any of CED's rules
      (until this post).

      The fact is that: 1) I have only moderated members (both on
      the creation/ID and evolution side) who break CED's rules
      (consider Cliff Lundberg, an evolutionist who has been a
      member of CED since its beginning and who I disagree with
      on almost everything, yet he has never been moderated,
      because he has never breached CED's rules), and 2) I
      needed strong rules because I am a creationist Moderator
      and evolutionists are the side where most (but not all) of the
      nasty behaviour comes from.

      Also consider John's own "scummy pond of creationism"
      and "Religion is the greatest untreated disease of the
      twenty-first century -- John Distazo" comments in this very
      post. If I had written something like that, imagine the outrage
      and posturing from John and his ilk.

      However, as always I bear John and Anti-CED members no ill-will.
      I wish them well for the future. ***

      JD>Oh yeah, John Beadle pointed out that Steve said that if
      >Anti-CED lasted longer than CED then in effect Anti-CED has
      >won. And so it seems that Anti-CED will win come July 22. [...]

      *** My congratulations to John and Anti-CED on their "win"! ***

      JD>Of course, CED will still be around... sort of. No one will
      >be able to post (except Steve the moderator,

      *** John is right that "CED will still be around" in the form of
      my blog CED <http://creationevolutiondesign.blogspot.com>.
      As with all blogs (AFAIK), "No one will be able to post"
      except the blogger. However, comments can be made about
      my posts to which I can reply. I have already had an
      exchange with one person.

      But unlike a list a blog is not measured by the number of
      debates, but by the number of visits. I have just installed a
      Site Meter which records the number of visits. They are
      (including my own visits - have today installed some code
      that will from now on exclude my own visits): "Total 106" and
      Average Per Day 45", and "Today 74". I thank any Anti-CED
      members who are in those totals!***

      JD>and he'll be
      >busy with his book, which will never be finished).

      *** Thanks to John for his concern, but actually my book,
      "Problems of Evolution"
      <http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/PoE/PoE00ToC.html>
      has been coming along nicely until the last few days. Once
      this last `dying kick' of CED is over (in about 21 hours time),
      I will have a *lot* more time to write my book and my blog,
      which I am *really* looking forward to. ***

      [...]

      Stephen E. Jones
      MODERATOR

      ---------------------------------------------------------
      "Biology is the study of complicated things that give the
      appearance of having been designed for a purpose."
      (Dawkins R., "The Blind Watchmaker," [1986], Penguin:
      London, 1991, reprint, p.1)
      Stephen E. Jones http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CreationEvolutionDesign
      ---------------------------------------------------------
    • Show all 5 messages in this topic