politics, religion and philosophy board

Post Reply New Topic

I'm sure with the right coding it would be entirely possible to have a section of the forums, where the OP of a thread was granted limited moderator status over all the posts in that thread.

haven't you heard? WP runs on steam power and punch cards...

Even if that were possible on the genuine antique software running this place though, it would be a nightmare in a forum discussing intangibles where the "facts" are pretty fungible. People would just edit out posts that contradict them you'd get dueling threads and such, i.e. even more ugliness and drama than in the current forum.

Sorry, but I think having an area of the forums where people can tell this board's many proselytising trolls to STFU and GTFO is a good idea, as it would allow people of a similar interest to actually have a discussion. Freedom of speech may well be good, but so is freedom of assembly, and for that reason there should be limits on exactly where freedom of speech is permitted.

Having a function like this would also be a huge improvement for the Haven section.

Pretty simple, and I think rules related to flaming already exist here.

True, but what "flaming" is or isn't, is extremely subjective.

On a side note: I'm not even sure why I'm piping in on this discussion, since I already avoid the existing forum like the plague, and would do the same with a new one, no matter how restrictive it is.

Not really. Someone could say s/he does not put stock in any "sky fairy", and I could come back and say, "Neither do I." DW_a_mom is talking about something different, like when someone says something obviously intended to belittle someone else ... and personally, I am all done with remaining silent whenever any bully here on WP does that. When I first got here about a year ago, I initially tried "rolling with the punches a bit" while getting to know people a bit and while learning my way around, but it did not take long for me to figure out the bullies here actually had the run of the playground ... and I eventually had to either leave altogether or ask a moderator to intervene on my behalf ... and the existing rules here took care of all of that in its entirety.



... and if anyone tries to belittle you about that and I happen to notice, I will give you a hand in dealing with him, her or them, if necessary. Bullies are insecure punks with no authority whatsoever and who can only get away with as much as the rest of us might allow.

All due respect, it really is subjective, and the very reason posts are often made in fun or innocence, then interpreted as flaming. The fact that you have an opinion, as stated above, is a good example of the subjective nature of flaming. You've made a decently constructed definition of it, however I am free to disagree with parts of it. I'm not going to get into how I might disagree with it here, simply because it's beside the point. Besides, if I debated your points here, it would take the thread off topic, and if I agreed with it all, it would deflate the point I'm trying to make right now. Because I can construct a differed opinion of it though, it is subjective. That's what makes balancing freedom of speech and open discussion with careful moderation very difficult at times.

Nope. It is never okay to have a laugh at the expense of another.

I'm not going to debate you here, that would be silly and moot anyway; we can't even get an ignore button around here let alone an active modding system. However, I do find the statement that disagreeing with someone's worldview is "proselytizing trolling" somewhat disturbing, fortunately our mod staff seems to feel otherwise.

Sure. I agree with you on that point, but sometimes it's all too easy to assume that's what the motivation is behind another poster, and be wrong. We aren't mind readers, and that's why whether something is flaming or not is subjective to the perception of the reader. Just because you think the poster is flaming, doesn't always mean it's their intention.

Given that someone was able to make the case that taken literally enough, God was a "sky fairy," I can't say that using that expression, while meant to gently mock, rises to the level of flaming. For me, it just wasn't worth the trouble. I have no interest in defending my faith inside a sea of atheists who seem to truly believe that faith is the root of all evil. I have plenty of other places in my life to discuss what I believe, but maybe that isn't true for all our members.

I do like the idea of a separate Faith board, because the title would imply that it is not for debating the validity of faith, but for discussing issues of faith. In contrast, a title of Religion indicates subject matter quite open to debate.

But that wouldn't solve the issues of those who would just to discuss all 3 incendiary topics in a more gentle manner.

That depends upon who is being mocked. If someone says something like that in order to mock "God", no harm has been done anywhere. But if someone says something like "Ah yes, you people and your 'sky fairy'...", the intent to flame and belittle is obvious. I do realize there is no way to completely end that kind of thing ever coming from insecure, arrogant people, but that does not mean control of the playground must be returned to the bullies.



Personally, I have "no interest in defending my faith" anywhere, and yes, there are many places where "people of faith" can discuss things. But what we have here are people with troubles and struggles and questions the typical "sea of atheists" could not possibly care any less about and would actually prefer remain in their suffering so they (the "sea") can use that to reinforce their personal delusions of doing relatively well.



Correct. Solving that problem will only happen when bullies are laid to rest.

As it seems unlikely Alex will create another forum specifically for religious believers would a sticky in somewhere like the Haven or Members called "Religious Faith - Issues and Practice" be the quickest and simplest thing to try? There is nothing to lose. Opened by a mod with guidelines in the opening post stating the purpose of the thread and to make it very clear that it isn't for discussing the validity or otherwise of religious beliefs and that such discussions should be limited to PPR. Worth a try?

I'm atheist / Zen Buddhist but I recognise the right of believers to discuss issues regarding their faith amongst themselves without harassment from those who would belittle them or their beliefs at every opportunity.

I would suggest that such a thread be clearly marked that any inflammatory or anti-religion posts will be deleted and if repeat offences occur warnings or other sanctions will be imposed.

Last edited by TallyMan on 23 Aug 2010, 12:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

It seems a bit hypocritical to complain about aggressive debate while characterizing other posters as insecure, arrogant, bullies and delusional. How can you expect anyone to respect your faith when you wear your disdain for the non-faithful on your sleeve?

I think this would get confusing as you'd have people of different faiths trying to get support on the same thread. I think it'd be better if thread creators put something in the subject - "[SUPPORT THREAD]" or something similar to designate that it's not a debate thread. If the majority of active PPR members are relatively small and well known, it seems like they could easily follow different rules and call a truce on these kinds of threads. That's not to say that you'll escape the "thread hijackers" - they persist on all the forums and I don't think you'll find a forum that has enough moderation to stop that.

That is not the complaint. The complaint is about things said and done in violation of existing rules.



People's own traits characterize them, and I have simply mentioned some of the things behind certain traits. However, I will admit to a bit of soapboxing there, and calling me out on that is exactly like the kind of thing we all need to do to help keep the bullies in check.



I am not asking anyone to "respect my faith", whatever that might mean, and I wear nothing on my sleeve. I simply call evil actions exactly what they are: evil, and quite unacceptable among civil people.