'Although I do agree with the thrust of the Webmasters post I would think it is a prerequisite for at least ONE moderator of a forum to have a high degree of knowledge of their subject to be able to "oversee" all posts for their accuracy/inaccuracies, and where they would then possibly need to intervene (in one way shape or another) to dispel or endorse these for the potential benefit/harm to all members.'
However is it your opinion, and opinion only, the Webmaster
never made is a pre requisite and actually made it pretty clear the opposite on how an 'expert' should be a moderator or rather not. You should probably take this up with him as a suggestion meanwhile respecting his views until if and when the time comes he edits them. I don't think its okay for a moderator to question a Webmaster
and therefore disagree and act out otherwise as he is the webmaster. You can also say they well he made you moderator, but considering only a few people including you volunteerd not to mention I'm sure he's busy doing other things and not reading this forum and concluding you are an 'expert' before giving you mod title as its entirely pointless.
'Those who were not emotionally involved into the subject of discussion, they did the best moderator job. They were the only people who could stay impartial.
Those who were emotionally involved into the subject of discussion, who were recognized as experts, recognized as experienced, supportive ... they actually did the WORST job when it comes to avoiding serious, hot conflicts. Sure, they were great in protecting their belief system and their forum from "potential" trolls, but they did a bad job altogether ... they could just not stay impartial.'
Going to your belief system comment... a belief system is not only in regards to religion, spiritual or 'God'. Actually going by dictionary.com definition it doesn't even pertain to a 'fixed religion'. A belief system does pertain to a philosophy or way of life. (See below). Considering there are no religious forums on Curezone, the Webmaster
must therefore must be speaking about Health Forums
such as the Water Fasting
per dictionary.com and wikipedia:
Belief system :
faith based on a series of beliefs but not formalized into a religion; also, a fixed coherent set of beliefs prevalent in a community or society
"The benefits of the fasting process however; its symptoms of elimination; and its effects upon the human body that conform to the Laws of our being, have been recorded/tested, and laid down as physiological facts with provable benefits that do not require a persons "faith" or a "belief system" for it to function."
So does that mean since I can assume its either fact or fiction, like say scientific medicine? If so then fasting does not belong in an alternative medicine forum.
Going into the FAQ of this particular forum:
Is there 100% scientific evidence that everyone goes through these stages exactly that way? I think the only stages that could be scientifically proved would be stage 1 as it pertains to the liver and glycogen stores and probably stage 2 as it pertains to Ketosis.
I'm not entirely sure how one can put a general time and date on how clear the mind will or will not be. (ie stage 4)
To make a blanket statement: "After day 20, the mind is affected with heightened clarity and emotional balance. Memory and concentration improve."
And how would one know that in stage 4 the healing of organs are 'completed'? I realize we all have the same organs at birth, if born healthy, but our organs are at completely different states upon fasting due to abuse, toxicity, diet, etc. Same as all of our bodies do not lose the same amount of weight per fasting based on the state of them to begin with.
I realize this is going by Shelton's experience, but again fasting is not considered scientific medicine, rather alternative medicine, which I believe to be subjective at times. Which in turn doesn't necessarily mean that someone arguing the stages of these FAQ would entirely be wrong, unless by someone who had a 'belief system' within them therefore would moderate and discredit anyone who challenged them.
It is said that a lot alternative medicine lacks evidence based assessment.
Now would fasting be alternative medicine (which can be subjective) or scientific medicine which would mean that everything according to Shelton
is fact and not fiction. If so then it has to be scientific medicine and has no business being at curezone as already state. If not, then it is alternative medicine and anyone does have the right to disagree with you and form their own opinions based on their experience (like Shelton) and should not be entirely dispeled by a moderator who has a set philosophy ie in this instance you, because you simply disagree with it based on your belief system. This is not in regards to blatant posts that will harm people with rubbish.
cannot be both scientific and alternative purely as they contradict eachother.
There are also trained Doctors who have posted based on scientific evidence of the possible contraindications on fasting:
So to say there are none based on Dr. Shelton
is not entirely fact because one could counter argue based on information and books with scientific effects on the body.
Which would go back to my entire point about your opinion and beliefs vs. the real facts and you moderating. Which in another one of your posts you just called it seemingly so:
"However, I have not chosen (as yet) to step down, as I am not a "quitter", but a "fighter" for my beliefs, which are borne out of my own and others shared life-experiences."
Anyways, I'm not trying to make this into a lengthy online conversation and this will most likely be my last post on this subject matter. This isn't an attack, which I would like to be made clear to you and all the other members. My formulated opinion and lengthy post was simulated by the webmaster's postings and how this forum seems to be handled under your 'supervision', not to mention your initial post where you asked for comments about you being moderator, which you should be able to take the bad with the good. Too many of your friends are confusing this with what you have done and how you have helped him, which is entirely irrelevant in this particular instance, nor are we needing a moderator as a teacher/educator going back to your 'control' and respect via your students. I find it utterly offensive that members infer that I am attacking you because I do not agree with you entirely. This type of 'in or out' attitude on this forum is why I remain a long term reader and not a usual poster.