A discussion of skepticism, logic, math, intelligent design creationism, board games, the Utah Jazz, marriage, having three children on the autism spectrum and two that not on the spectrum, being a DBA, teaching, the St. Louis metro area, my health since being diagnosed with ALS, and anything else that comes to mind.
With formal systems, such as mathematics, you can have certainty and demonstrability, but not reality.
With science, such as physics, you can have reality and demonstrability, but not certainty.
With belief systems, such as Christianity, you can have reality and certainty, but not demonstrability.
After the great example of St. Thomas, the principle stands, or ought always to have stood established; that we must either not argue with a man at all, or we must argue on his grounds and not ours. We may do other things instead of arguing, according to our views of what actions are morally permissible; but if we argue we must argue "On the reasons and statements of the philosophers themselves."
Any habitual action, such as eating or dressing, may be performed on the appropriate occasion, without any need of thought, and the same seems to be true of a painfully large proportion of our talk.
Posts
9 comments:
Hey, Eric, you're an admin over at Jazzfanz, aincha? Splain sumthin to me, eh?
I see Vinny hangin round over there with 4 warnings, and I have seen it claimed (dunno if it's accurate) that a fifth warning will result in a 30 say suspension.
When I try to log in, I git this message:
"You have been permanently banned from this board.
Please contact the Board Administrator for more information.
Reason given for ban: 4 Warnings in 180 Days
A ban has been issued on your username."
I thought sure that I only got 3 warnings, not 4, but I couldn't say for sure. Whatever, its "permanent," eh?
Zup wit dat?
They changed the policy (well) after you were banned. It used to be 3 warnings in 180 was a one-week suspension, four was a ban.
It is now 3 warnings is a one-week suspension, 4 is a two-week suspensions, and 5 is a ban. However, no amnesty was offered to previoiusly banned posters (so, for example, LostTacoVender, sidbar, you, and DuckRodgers are all still banned). VINYLONE has served his two-week suspension, and is one warning away from a ban. He has noted a number of times that there are things he will not comment on because he is being careful to avoid it.
As for banned people getting back in, that's strictly according to Jason's preferences.
One Brow said: "As for banned people getting back in, that's strictly according to Jason's preferences."
Well, I guess that's all that really needs to be said, right there, but thanks for fillin in the details, ya know?
Looks like ya might be losin some street cred with your homies, Eric, by doin anything except just laughin at Feser, eh?
"The Philosophy Subcommittee then attempted to justify its existence by giving a review of The Last Superstition. The Science contingent wish it noted that they scoffed heartily at this book."
If I was doing ths for street cred, I would disagree with UnBeguiled or J so often.
One Brow said: "However, no amnesty was offered to previoiusly banned posters (so, for example, LostTacoVender...
Apparently LTV was before my time, because I don't recall ever reading one of his posts. It was nonetheless obvious that he made a big impression on the board because I saw frequent references to him. A certain segment seems to have intensely hated him, while others apparently had a positive view and found his posts entertaining.
Just curious, Eric... Were you familiar with this guy? If so, what were his pros and cons, and what did he do to get banned, if you know? I assume, without knowing, that the guy was intelligent, if nothing else.
LostTacoVendor was an outspoken and self-identified militant black Republican, intelligent, and direct, from what I recall.
After he was banned once, he was given a second chance. His avatar became a picture of him gagged, symbolizing his protest.
Of course, I wasn't a moderator, so I don't know any details behind his warnings, and even if I was inclined to research them, I don't think it would be appropriate to share them without his permission.
He also paticipated in the Harpring Sucks blog for a while.
One Brow said: "intelligent...direct"
That's enough for bein banned at Jazzfanz, right there, probably, but this part clinches it, I spoze: "Republican."
What was your personal reaction to the guy? Should he have been banned, for disruption, trolling, offensivenss, generally upsetting people, or whatever (general) traits he had, ya think?
As I recall, Kicky pasted a quote from him about me (maybe it was originally posted at Harpsucks, after he had been banned). It was to the effect that it took real talent to "hijack an entire board," like I did, and he knew it because it had done it several times himself. I got the feeling that Kicky (and probably his crew) kinda equated me with LTV, and therefore strongly disapproved of him.
... but this part clinches it, I spoze: "Republican."
Why would you think that? My impression of Jason is that he is more likely to vote Republican, and colton doesn't strike me as being liberal.
What was your personal reaction to the guy? Should he have been banned, for disruption, trolling, offensivenss, generally upsetting people, or whatever (general) traits he had, ya think?
He never upset me, that I recall. He was just another poster to me, and doesn't really stand out from the background that much. Since I wasn't a moderator at the time, I would have overlooked various warnable offenses even if I had read them.
I got the feeling that Kicky (and probably his crew) kinda equated me with LTV, and therefore strongly disapproved of him.
You could ask sirkickyass yourself, of course, but I don't think they would have both been contributors to HapringSucks if there was that level of antipathy.
Post a Comment