[pj1]

...or apparent lack of.

He just seems to spout unrelated religious phraseology peppered with bitter sarcasm. He also seems to routinely (although not directly) insult people within the threads.

I have no idea how/if that should be moderated, but I felt it noteworthy enough to flag here.

They can't allow everyone to find out we live on God's footstool with a firmament (dome) above us, now can they?

The truth will set you free..."Flat Earth"

Can you land that on a floating barge? Maybe a "Looks so fake it must be real" stupid people.....

The earth is flat as a pancake and the charlatans milked you good.

[Dr David Thork]

In the examples you picked, no one got insulted. His posts have more than just 'nuh uh', there's no text speak or using comic sans or links to unwieldy text books.

What is the problem?

seems to spout unrelated religious phraseology

Not against the rules

peppered with bitter sarcasm.

Not against the rules

He also seems to routinely (although not directly) insult people within the threads.

For which you provided no evidence

I have no idea how/if that should be moderated,

Well it isn't being moderated ... because its not against the rules.

but I felt it noteworthy enough to flag here.

Noted. I'm sure your online relationship with J-man will only be improved with this hit piece. ... See? Sarcasm - not against the rules.

[pj1]

Thanks, Thork.  Extremely enlightening.

He also seems to routinely (although not directly) insult people within the threads.

For which you provided no evidence

Can you land that on a floating barge? Maybe a "Looks so fake it must be real" stupid people.....

I thought this might qualify as indirectly insulting the other people in the thread.  But what do I know, I'm just a noob trying to familiarise himself with TFES etiquette.

[pj1]

Perhaps I should re-phrase and just say... does citing religion with no real contribution to the discussion count as posting low content in the upper fora?

To which a reasonable person (read *someone other than Thork*) may just reply "nah that's cool with us". 

And all would be well in the world.

[Pete Svarrior]

The "stupid" post is in Complete Nonsense, though. Very few rules apply there. And even then, "stupid people" would definitely be on the mild side of things.

The one non-CN post you've highlighted here has a point to it, even if it's written in a needlessly obscure and roundabout way, and even if I think the point is particularly weak.

Aside from his snark, Thork is mostly right. That said, you've done the right thing by asking. It's always better to clarify where we stand

[Dr David Thork]

Saying, "All leftists are stupid" isn't the same as saying "Guest is stupid". Its not a personal attack. It is a general statement about the intelligence of a group.

To which a reasonable person (read *someone other than Thork*)

Now see that is a direct insult. But you feel this is fine. So why are you complaining?

[pj1]

Saying, "All leftists are stupid" isn't the same as saying "Guest is stupid". Its not a personal attack. It is a general statement about the intelligence of a group.

I did intentionally state "indirectly", rather that saying "personal attack". 

To which a reasonable person (read *someone other than Thork*)

Now see that is a direct insult. But you feel this is fine. So why are you complaining?

Because I sense that you thrive on this kind of thing. But I apologise none-the-less.

Thanks, Pete. Noted.