I guess I can come to only one conclusion concerning the veracity of the following:
(Natural Law)"If I told you how I know the abuse statistics it would only result in more abuse abuse and probably elicit a warning."
If NL is privy to this kind of information, shouldn’t it be available to all?
For the record, I am skeptical of the claim. The FRoman Catholics seems to have more than their share of warnings from the mods to stop spamming the abuse button although they do seem to have the lion’s share of posts removed.
Which indicates that even if Protestants do hit the abuse button more often, more than likely, it’s warranted.
If you really want to know I applied an exercise in forensic deduction. About 3 months ago I began capturing deleted posts by keeping two windows open simultaneously and referring back and forth to identify the poster and content of the deleted posts. I then went back through the three months of postings on the Religion Forum and reviewed the nearly identical content of the deleted posts to those that weren't deleted and came up with three plausible conclusions, each with a greater than 60% confidence interval, for the disparity in which the standards are applied:
1) Inherent Moderator Bias toward Catholics - I discounted this one
2) Inherent Moderator Bias toward or against individual posters - possible but not probable
3) Response to abuse complaints (the squeaky wheel gets the grease).
4) The standards are applied equally - very low probability (<25%) in light of the examples available.
It is also pretty obvious how certain FReepers make personal insults by substituting terms like "Rome" for "you" in very targeted, specific responses. Now lets see if this results in the warnings and abuse abuse I predicted.