I nominate bucketybuck to teach a Sensitivity Training Coursefor the mods so they will learn to stop hurting everyone’s tender feelings.
No. The OP offered up a hypothetical situation. Czarcasm offered up hypothetical excuses that would be given to dodge the tests. Excuses we’ve all heard hundreds of times in the past by the woos. Did you visit the links I provided for you?
If you believe that he broke the rules report his post. If nothing comes of that you can start a separate ATMB thread regarding his behavior.
This thread is about you breaking the “don’t be a jerk” rule and getting called on it.
I think a good point has been made and I am in agreement that what this message board needs is more female genitalia.
What?!:o
AFAICT, there are several reasons to ask for a cite:
[list=A][li]You are genuinely unsure that a given claim is true, and need to see that it is so[/li][li]You know perfectly well that a given claim is not true, and are demonstrating this, and[/li][li]Trolling, defined in this instance as “posting with intent to annoy and disrupt the conversation”. [/list]The demand for cites in sense C is annoying, and annoyingly common, and certain Dopers who shall go nameless are worse offenders than Peter Morris. IMO. [/li]
I think everyone who read the thread got the idea - Peter Morris is saying that Czarcasm is not being consistent in his standards of skepticism. Whether that is true or not, I neither know nor care. But having made the point, you might want to consider dropping it.
Having the other person admit they were wrong should not be necessary to one’s awareness that one has won the argument. Because it hardly ever happens, especially about people’s beliefs about God and the supernatural and things like that.
Regards,
Shodan
cite?
When was the last time I did so?
Give specific examples.
Statement of fact: You are a jerk. (an insult)
Conditional statement of fact: You might be a jerk. (possible insult)
Moderator warning: Don’t be a jerk. (not an insult)
Always nice to see others paying such close attention to what I post. 
:shrugs:
Regards,
Shodan
Watch using the word “woo”. I believe Peter has classified it as “hate speech.”
Peter, when did Czarcasm:
Read the thread and see.
No. You’re not remotely entitled to them: What on earth makes you think that my observation on your behavior is some sort of debate proposition, which requires substantiating evidence?
Besides, given what I have seen of the way you conduct yourself in discussions, it wouldn’t help matters anyway. If you can’t already comprehend (without being supplied with “cites”) your own martyr complex here at SDMB, then nothing short of long-term therapy and deep soul-searching is going to help matters any. Good luck with that.
I just did and I didn’t see. Can you quote a relevant posting from Czarcasm?
Every use of the word “woowoo” or just simply “woo.” It means female genitalia. He uses it over and over, in every thread that touches on the paranormal.
It does? Cite?
This kind of thing belongs in the Pit, not ATMB. Please tone it down.
That is not what “woo” means, and this issue is closed. C-L-O-S-E-D. It was discussed at absurd, ridiculous length in the other thread, and you’re not going to trot it out again here.
By the way, Peter, my first and earliest recollection of you being on here at SDMB is a thread in which you tried to field the ludicrous argument that…
:::drum roll:::
I guess some things never change. (How’s that for a “cite”!)
Every thread that touches on the paranormal? Really??
Cite, please, of my using the term “woo” in every thread that touches on the paranormal.
edited to add: Forget the cite-didn’t see the moderator note before I posted…although that would have been one hell of a cite, you’d have to admit.
You’re right. I’m sorry. Will tone it down.
Just to emphasize: we’re not re-doing the “woo” thing in this thread. Or any other thread in ATMB, as far as I’m concerned.