After doing a (maybe not good enough) lot of moderation in the AGW thread(s) it seems that the turn around time of comments contra/pro AGW is about half a year.
Also, various participants in the thread are trying to find ways to circumvent my demand for only peer reviewed papers be used as support for claims made in the thread (~4 weeks abo), then another warning that blogs will no longer be allowed (there are still 1 or 2 infractions I have to give in the AGW thread, but is has been a bit busy the last days) we get links to post that link to blogs, or links to TV stations (which are indeed not blogs).
Then there is the snarkyness of the various opponents in the thread, which stops for about 1 page at the max. Maybe this is because of too lax moderation?
I don't want the AGW threads to become a police state on BAUT, but I have the bad feeling that that is the only way we can have an exchange of viewpoints. THAT TAKES WAY TOO MUCH TIME FOR THE MODERATION TEAM.
Naturally, there are various solutions to this "problem:"
- We can just close the threads and forbid any discussion on the topic, and let those that want to discuss go to JREF (where the rules are much more loose than on BAUT) or some other board.
- We could just leave the thread open and not moderate at all anymore, put it in its own little corner of the board and let chaos reign
- We could start anew, with very strickt rules on behaviour, allowed references and language.
Actually, I don't care anymore for this thread and most definitely don't care for option #3, I have a life and a job too.
Therefore, make your choice and give your opinion here in this thread (NO DISCUSSION ONLY YOUR ARGUED OPINION).