Thw purpose of moderators

[scourge99]

What is the responsibility of moderators on this forum? Obviously it is to enforce the rules but is it also to foster productive debate?

For example, there are many behaviors and responses that are not against the rules but would be considered poor debate etiquette. For example,

1) quoting copious amounts of text.
2) not supporting assertions and claims.
3) telling your opponent to go read your other posts / a specific book/ or take a course, if they want an answer.
4) misrepresenting or altering your opponent's position or quote.

I think most of these can be legitimate responses in the proper circumstances so mods would have to look at them on a case by case basis.

But in general, these things aren't against the rules. They are more like examples of poor debate etiquette. Is it considered the responsibility of moderators to intervene/comment when these things occur? It seems like the mods kind of do for some. For example, challenging a claim that is not substantiated.

A good parallel to this is live debates. All debates have a moderator but some are more pro-active than others. For example, in some debates the moderator just keeps track of the time speakers have and cuts them off if necessary. In others, the moderator actively challenges a debater if he believes one side is misunderstanding or seems to be dodging a particular point.

[Philbert]

3) telling your opponent to go read your other posts / a specific book/ or take a course, if they want an answer.

I've been doing this because I simply don't have the time to repeat all my arguments from the beginning for each and every poster who comes along and challenges me.

Also, I've already made many of my arguments repeatedly in a number of threads, and at some point I'm doing the forum no favor by continually rehashing the same conversations.

Please keep in mind that some members have already read my arguments multiple times, and it's boring for them to read them yet again.

[scourge99]

3) telling your opponent to go read your other posts / a specific book/ or take a course, if they want an answer.

I've been doing this because I simply don't have the time to repeat all my arguments from the beginning for each and every poster who comes along and challenges me.

You don't have the time to post a link to your own writings? Instead you expect others to find your responses out of hundreds?

Also, strange that you don't have the time considering you do have the time to make 500 posts in less than 1 month.

Also, I've already made many of my arguments repeatedly in a number of threads, and at some point I'm doing the forum no favor by continually rehashing the same conversations.

In those cases i think a simple link to the post(s) is sufficient.

Please keep in mind that some members have already read my arguments multiple times, and it's boring for them to read them yet again.

Really? You are that concerned about the boredom of readers?

[Philbert]

You don't have the time to post a link to your own writings? Instead you expect others to find your responses out of hundreds?

You seem to be under the impression that it's my obligation to serve you. Sorry dude, not true.

I do make a good faith effort to serve those who serve me by filling the threads with thoughtful interesting reading. But I'm not going to type up a 1,000 word review for someone whose post contains nothing but a ten word demand.

Also, strange that you don't have the time considering you do have the time to make 500 posts in less than 1 month.

Yes, I've already been overly generous with my remarks. If you wish to kick my butt, that would be a reasonable point to make.

Should it interest someone to read my posts, they are welcome to do so, and any member's posts are very easily found.

But I take no responsibility for serving whiny brats sitting on their lazy fannies making rude demands, whoever they may be.

In those cases i think a simple link to the post(s) is sufficient.

If you want such a link, go get it yourself, I am not your Mama.

Really? You are that concerned about the boredom of readers?

Actually I am, because if I bore them too much, they stop reading my posts.

Get a life scourge99, and welcome to my ignore list.

[otseng]

What is the responsibility of moderators on this forum? Obviously it is to enforce the rules but is it also to foster productive debate?

Moderators are only expected to enforce the rules. This alone keeps us busy. It would take up way too much time to also foster productive debate. It should be the forum members' responsibility to foster productive debate.

[Philbert]

No, that's wrong! I demand the mods find all the posts that might interest me, bring them to my house, and read them to me while I lounge in the bath tub. And bring me a drink too you lazy slaves!

[A Troubled Man]

But I take no responsibility for serving whiny brats sitting on their lazy fannies making rude demands, whoever they may be.

Get a life scourge99, and welcome to my ignore list.

That must be a rather lengthy list by now, from so many here who keep telling you the same thing, those whiny brats making rude demands for something valid and credible.

But then, I must be so very ignorant to not have concluded that trolling these forums repeating the same fallacies over and over, is a life, or at the very least, the pursuit of one.

[Angel]

What is the responsibility of moderators on this forum? Obviously it is to enforce the rules but is it also to foster productive debate?

For example, there are many behaviors and responses that are not against the rules but would be considered poor debate etiquette. For example,

1) quoting copious amounts of text.
2) not supporting assertions and claims.
3) telling your opponent to go read your other posts / a specific book/ or take a course, if they want an answer.
4) misrepresenting or altering your opponent's position or quote.

I think most of these can be legitimate responses in the proper circumstances so mods would have to look at them on a case by case basis.

But in general, these things aren't against the rules. They are more like examples of poor debate etiquette. Is it considered the responsibility of moderators to intervene/comment when these things occur? It seems like the mods kind of do for some. For example, challenging a claim that is not substantiated.

A good parallel to this is live debates. All debates have a moderator but some are more pro-active than others. For example, in some debates the moderator just keeps track of the time speakers have and cuts them off if necessary. In others, the moderator actively challenges a debater if he believes one side is misunderstanding or seems to be dodging a particular point.

I only have problems with #2 on your list. Supporting your assertions is part of the rules on this forum (rule#5). I think moderators should be on top of enforcing that rule. The person making the complaint should include specifics. For instance, one member kept misrepresenting my view on a matter, and I even specifically asked that member to show me where my view involved what she was saying. The person could not do it and instead misstated my view again. I reported it but nothing was done. If this forum becomes another YouTube where people can say anything and not have to back it up, then it loses some value in my judgment as any illogical and unevidenced based DEBATE would lose value.

[Angel]

What is the responsibility of moderators on this forum? Obviously it is to enforce the rules but is it also to foster productive debate?

Moderators are only expected to enforce the rules. This alone keeps us busy. It would take up way too much time to also foster productive debate. It should be the forum members' responsibility to foster productive debate.

If productive debate involves making sure that when ALL members engage in DEBATE that involves backing up their claims with logic and/or evidence then the moderators should be enforcing that. One reason is because those are part of your rules. If you don't enforce that rule then people won't respect it. If those rules aren't enforce then that usually leads me having to play like a moderator or I end up having to PRESS the person who keeps making REPEATED unsubstantiated claims to retract or support their view.

I understand that moderators don't have time but it can also be that you don't have enough moderators.

[otseng]

What is the responsibility of moderators on this forum? Obviously it is to enforce the rules but is it also to foster productive debate?

Moderators are only expected to enforce the rules. This alone keeps us busy. It would take up way too much time to also foster productive debate. It should be the forum members' responsibility to foster productive debate.

If productive debate involves making sure that when ALL members engage in DEBATE that they up their claims with logic and/or evidence then the moderators should be enforcing that. One reason is because those are part of your rules. If you don't enforce that rule then people won't respect it. And someone like me, if those rules aren't enforce then that usually leads me to having to play like a moderator or I end up having to PRESS the person who keeps making REPEATED unsubstantiated claims to retract or support their view.

I understand that moderators don't have time but it can also be that you don't have enough moderators.

There is actually a procedure for unsupported claims. It takes multiple violations (admittedly this number is not defined) for a moderator to intervene. We don't have the time to intervene in every unsupported claim.

We can always use more moderators that are qualified. Who would you recommend?