I am guessing that the last post counted in the 23 post sequence in question was one I made at 8:13 P.M. on 7-7. If I count back 23 posts from there, I come to a post that Marcus made at 8:17 P.M on 7-6...Prior to making my first post in this 23-post long sequence, I had not made a post since about 8:00 P.M. the night before—about a 15 hour period. In the interim, Sharpie, Raspberry Delight (twice), Marcus, and you, Mo, all made posts, almost all of which were addressed to comments I had made before I left the thread for the night. I was not there to immediately respond to them of course, although I did address some later in the thread.
But the first thing I did was make a couple of posts that were directed to the discussion itself rather than particular posters: one quoting from atheists.org and one quoting from Richard Dawkins' website. In my view, these two posts added a LOT more to the advancement and stimulation of the general topic than the 6 posts that been made while I was gone, but that's probably just my own self-bias. Eric works, and, although he appears to have made a couple of posts during his lunch break, most of his posts are made after 5:00 P.M., so I certainly didn’t expect him to “immediately respond” to any of the posts I was making that were intended primarily for his reading and consideration.
As far as “CONSECUTIVE" posts go: On 7-7 I made 6 consecutive posts in a 46 minute period between 12:18 and 1:04. Just prior to that, at 12:11, Eric had made a post in response to me and my first two posts were directed to that particular comment (the two could have been combined, I suppose, but I had received no warnings and thought nothing of it at the time). Those two posts were followed by quotations from an article I was reading on the web about the relationship between secularism and religion, which were posted for general consideration by Eric or anyone else interested in the discussion. The last two were addressed to you, Mo. Although one of those posts specifically quoted a prior (joking) post of yours, they were both just joking posts on my part—which you may have strongly resented, I dunno, but, if so, I’m sorry.
Then Eric made another post at 1:07 P.M. which responded to one of my posts. Thereafter he did not return to the thread until 5:36 P.M., when he made his next comment. In the intervening 4-5 hours, I made a total of 5 posts, one of which one intentionally left blank, so 4, really. Of those 4, 2 were addressed to Eric’s last point, one answered a question posed to me in a previous post by Sharpie, and the final one merely noted the hateful rep hit I received for the 3rd post, and asked if Sharpie had given it to me.
If there is any more to the “CONTEXT” that you think is important here, Mo. Please feel free to point it out. If not, is there something in particular about the TIME FRAME which you think makes these posts particularly intolerable. Eric begin responding again after he got back from work. Does it bother you, or other mods that he did not respond immediately? It is really not accurate to say that “nobody is responding” to my posts, just because no one responds until later. But even if no one responds, is that a reason not to make a post in the first place? Can’t people find something of value to consider in a post even if they don’t personally respond, whether immediately, or ever? How I can I know if, or when, anyone will respond when I make a post? I can’t know, best I can tell. Should that deter me from making a post to begin with?
