This is a more topic specific place for the debate currently going on in the definitions thread. I ask that it be moved here so interested parties can look at it here.
Actually, I'm in favor of any further debate of the issue being locked. It does nothing to further the purpose of these boards, it draws time and energy away from things that do, and it brings out nastiness in at least one of us (me; I shan't speak for others, although as a case in point, this 'debate' tempts me to).
Of course, I'm not a moderator, and it's probably not my place to suggest such things.
Actually, I agree with you, but the purpose of the other thread was learning, and it looked to be turning into an argument.
BTW, if you ever have the time, I believe you would make an excellent moderator for these boards, should you volunteer. Granted, I've been led to believe you are in college or something, so time is lacking.
I'm not reliable enough. I'm out of college now, but I'm not sure I could be counted on to be here regularly enough to take on those duties. Besides, it's an official Valdon Inc. forum (I think, or this section of it is), and I'm not even on staff.
I'm more comfortable as a not-mod. This way, my words and actions don't reflect poorly on anyone but me.
Yeah, I think the creation/evolution debate should be closed too. I haven't really been following it, but I've seen enough to agree. It doesn't do anything besides raise tensions between Scott and Eric.
I'm fine with dropping the debate.
That may have something to do with my having gotten the last word in. :/
I think it does serve purposes, but ones that are admittedly with little relation to Multiverser.
And I did learn some things in the debate.
Brock,
We like to reccommend Wodium as our Explainer of All Rules Multiversal. Its one of his hats around here.
Ya know what though, just an aside. What's the point in arguing about creation vs evolution, especially here? You're not going to convince each other, and since you will have to be dead before you're 100% certain that there is or is not a God, why argue?
The cynical answser is that its part of societal intimidation. Remember that illustration I made of post Ice Age tribes standing on opposite sides of a clearing, and shaking their spears at each other? Thats our modern, enlightened oh so wise Democracy in action.
There are other purposes involved, but don't underestimate the joy of shouting at the other tribe 'Na-na-na-nah!'. Its just like two pro sports teams and their respective cities.
There are other purposes involved, let me reiterate.
Remember that illustration I made of post Ice Age tribes standing on opposite sides of a clearing, and shaking their spears at each other?
Yeah Eric, we did that during the Cold War, except it was setting off nuclear test blasts as a display of our power. Look where that almost got us.....
I thought it worked well.
We weren't enslaved by genocidists. We didn't blow up our civilization, and usher in a dark age. I personally thought it was a fairly close to optimal solution to the problem. Granted, I wished that Eisenhower had marched West and liberated the peasants from their nomenklatura masters...
Granted, I wished that Eisenhower had marched West and liberated the peasants from their nomenklatura masters...
I don't have a clue what you just said, and I'm not sure I want you to explain it to me.
The concept though was MAD Mutually Assured Destruction. If you shoot at us, we will wipe you off the map also. There was a high-ranking guy who's thinking on that was "If there are 2 Americans and 1 Russian left when it's over, we won."
(Doing Therapy)
I'm also willing to close it, given how it dragged out last time.