Improving the quality of debate on this website.

Post Reply New Topic

I am fed up with threads descending into chaos and discussions about Star Treck. I am also fed up with poorly thought out posts that use form rather than substance and do not clearly make a point.

I therefore suggest that a limit be placed of two posts per thread.

This would allow a poster to voice an opinion and then allow a rebuttal for deal with any arguments his or her original post generated. It would focus posts and encourage sensible debate.

What do other users think?

I think that you are wrong.

This is not a website dedicated to formalized debate, but to being an "... online resource and community for Autsim and Asperger's".

Welcome to the community.

To clarify, I was only suggesting this for the Politics, Activism and Media Representation Section.

Not the wider site!

I agree about your comments regarding the resource nature of the site as a whole.

And to avoid a charge of hypocrisy I shall post no further on this thread.

Well, there's your two posts, and here are my two posts.

Are you going to post again in this thread, and thus violate your own rule, or are you going to refrain from posting in this thread, thereby asserting your own rule upon youself while the rest of us have a merry lark ignoring your rule in this and every other thread on this website?

Yeah a few others and I had some humor that included star trek. Lighten up. Having a sense of humor is part of being human and I'm no alien nor Vulcan. I did like the Data on star trek.

Science fiction is mostly written by people like us , outsiders with a long view and an alternative take . SF writers have never encountered an alien species . They are basing everything on observations of life on this planet. Hence science fiction is to a degree about human life, society and individuals, reintepreted, recycled and reflected in a unique and meaninful way . It is a metaphor .

So how much of this recycled observation is incorporated in our personal systems of understanding?

I mean, we are on a website called Wrong Planet. We describe NT's as an alien species, and we talk about observing them and understanding them as if we'd just landed.


I think it is valid to use metaphor in serious debate , and also to use it playfully : play is how we learn the doing of culture, how we absorb it without having to think about it . - as Hacking ( a critic of TOM) points out, you can't learn to rollerskate by doing a Ph.D in mechanical enigineering.

Most of us missed out on play the first time around which is why we are at a social distance from society and why many of us are drawn to SF style observation and paradigm type.

In reality Earth women are the most beautiful and profoundly inteligent species the males of our kind have yet encountered. To live with them requires skills and a degree of playful humor. To have children requires a lot of skills and a lot more playful humor.

We do need to play as well as think .

Meme.

I think that a two posts per thread maximum is very rigid. One never knows where the conversation is going to go, and it would be a shame if you wound up having to reply but that would put you past post limit.

I really think both sides of the issue need to be put forth.

For instance, http://www.duke.edu/web/DRAGO/humor/tre ... icard.html

But on the other hand http://www.finsel.com/personal/humor/pi ... -kirk.aspx

These are important issues that merit further debate.

Sometimes back and forth, with more than 2 posts each, is needed in a conversation as part of that sensible debate.

Arbitrary limits on how much one can post don't help people who have a lot to respond to.

W AI please note this thread is not about star trek .

I believe a limit of two posts per thread is a bad idea. That would disallow a thorough discussion of topics. Many topics require multiple posts by the same author in order to clarify topics. Furthermore, a limit to posting would be hard to patrol. That's my opinion.