Frank,
I appreciate the well-framed reply (which, because of it's length, I'll incorporate by link:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREE/message/111056)
The crux of the discussion is that you assert that to engage in a thread on randomness is to invite certain allusion to religion that would violate the group guidelines, and therefore is inadvisable.
I defer to your experience, but that's not at all obvious to me. In terms of pure physical mechanics, it certainly possible to describe the workings of probability and explain that while patterns will manifest themselves in play, they're purely random in their occurrence and an unreliable basis from which to predict any pattern in play going forward. There's no need to deliberately deny the involvement of an invisible hand, or any other phenomenon outside the pure mechanics.
Of course, in the course of such a discussion, it's entirely possible that someone else should raise the topic of supernatural, divine, or other outside forces. If so, then the tactic is simply not to engage in those topics, noting that while there's no desire to invalidate any such beliefs, the primary topic doesn't require their involvement
Don't get me wrong, my philosophies have a strong religious underpinning. I just never encountered anything at odds with my math training.
In truth, Frank, in my 10+ year experience with this group, I've found few topics that can't be addressed without level headed, civil, participation -- particularly when the focus is kept to facts and opinions, while respected, should largely be sidelined. Not all such discussions go cleanly, but that's always the risk and where the moderator sits in reserve as referee.
