Sounds suspiciously like the behavior that they hated from medved when he'd post his creation science website links on each crevo thread. Isn't that odd? But then, I shouldn't question them. they're so much smarter than little old me.
Sounds suspiciously like the behavior that they hated from medved when he'd post his creation science website links on each crevo thread. Isn't that odd?
It would be if ALS's description were accurate, but it's not. The original proposal was here. Nothing there about sending "all newbies" to a "pro-evo" archive "once they entered a thread" -- it was specifically about a having a FAQ that people could be directed to only if they hit on a frequent topic which had been discussed to death before.
The "pro-evo website" came up in post #511, since it already had comprehensive and fair-minded FAQs for many of the usual topics plus links to relevant counterpoint pages on anti-evo sites, and it was suggested that reinventing the wheel might be a waste of time for items already covered there. The two main replies (by evos, note) said that it still would probably be a better idea to develop FR's own in-house "crevo FAQ".
And when ALS went aghast at the idea of actually directing anyone to a putatively "pro-evo" site, I pointed out the obvious: "Sure -- if they're going to participate in crevo discussions, they should read and understand the scientific side of the debate. You want to hide it from them?"
So when ALS now breathlessly reports a nefarious plot to "formulate a plan to send all newbies to a pro-evo website once they entered a thread", note what a misleading summary it was, and keep that in mind the next time(s) ALS makes accusatory claims.
But then, I shouldn't question them. they're so much smarter than little old me.
We're certainly less snidely sarcastic, anyway.