Originally posted by Taoman Well said Robbie. "Infested" indeed. lol. Greetings. I think the basic rules of forum use would sufficiently address the problems if followed, with more frequent reminders and guidance from moderators.
One doesn't want to stifle the free interchange of ideas or comments between followers of different paths or philosophies.
But unfortunately the rules are b ...[text shortened]... trusion into the general debate, regardless of the validity of the points being made.
While Im certainly an offender at times, I have to say that in my estimation the JWs on this site are by far the biggest offender and break many of those guidelines.
Originally posted by Rajk999 While Im certainly an offender at times, I have to say that in my estimation the JWs on this site are by far the biggest offender and break many of those guidelines.
I'm sure we all offend at times. Stronger moderation would certainly help but that would put an extra workload on the moderators. They would be spending a disproportionate time here when they are trying to manage a chess website.
I don't really have a solution, other than shutting down the forum entirely! At least I would get a lot more work done.
Originally posted by Taoman Well said Robbie. "Infested" indeed. lol. Greetings. I think the basic rules of forum use would sufficiently address the problems if followed, with more frequent reminders and guidance from moderators.
One doesn't want to stifle the free interchange of ideas or comments between followers of different paths or philosophies.
But unfortunately the rules are b ...[text shortened]... trusion into the general debate, regardless of the validity of the points being made.
The forum guidelines are intentionally broadly written to excuse RHP from liability in the event that they remove posts. Thankfully, they are not rigidly enforced. That would kill all interest in the forums.
I don't want some moderator deciding what is too defamatory or abusive for me. I don't want them to take offense on my behalf. I am against censorship in general. If the words of certain posters make them look ugly, that is a reflection on them, and they will suffer damage to their reputation. This is actually a good thing, as it exposes their ugliness for all to see, and reduces their credibility.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie If they dare? one has no need to go to the science forum, spirituality is infested with scientific threads
1.what is the theory of evolution
3.primates with moral sense
5. the age of the universe
7.the age of the universe
8. famous scientists who believed in God
12.bacteria
As far as I can tell, NONE of those threads was posted on this forum for the stated reasons that threads are to be posted on the Science forum. All of them were posted on this forum for the purpose to which this Spirituality forum is being put by many, if not most, of its frequent posters. Those opposed to the point made in these posts were all too willing to go for the bait, showing that they know the reason for these posts. Pavlov lives!
That purpose these posts serve is the ongoing and unresolvable (here) conflict between reactionary fundamentalist-style Christianity and the modern world, in this case, the modern world as represented by popularized, antitheistic readings of modern science.
So have I offended both sides evenly? I can work on that.
Originally posted by JS357 As far as I can tell, NONE of those threads was posted on this forum for the stated reasons that threads are to be posted on the Science forum. All of them were posted on this forum for the purpose to which this Spirituality forum is being put by many, if not most, of its frequent posters. Those opposed to the point made in these posts were all too willing to ...[text shortened]... heistic readings of modern science.
So have I offended both sides evenly? I can work on that.
reactionary fundamentalist-style Christianity and the modern world
weasel words! and just straight hot of the presses,
another deeply spiritual topic, Darwinian selection in humans right now! thank you
sonhouse.
Originally posted by SwissGambit The forum guidelines are intentionally broadly written to excuse RHP from liability in the event that they remove posts. Thankfully, they are not rigidly enforced. That would kill all interest in the forums.
I don't want some moderator deciding what is too defamatory or abusive for me. I don't want them to take offense on my behalf. I am against censo ...[text shortened]... ally a good thing, as it exposes their ugliness for all to see, and reduces their credibility.
Thanks for that thoughtful contribution. I agree to a point. If we see a forum discussion a bit like a conversation of a few people standing in a group, some of the behaviors - constantly off topic/dominating the conversation/prosyletising - the topic at hand progresses little and it ends up an unenjoyable conversation and somewhat non-stimulating. Legal-like enforcement rarely works;the most a moderator can do, and I believe should do more often than is apparent is remind of guidelines to encourage self regulation. I have NEVER witnessed moderator input on the forum when I was earlier more participative, although I think it has happened.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie Indeed time and again we are confronted with base materialism deviod of even a
semblance of spirituality in some guise or another. Nor is it only Christians who are
subject to it, my friend from India, rvsakhadeo, a Hindu by faith has introduced many
fine spiritual concepts only to be subject to the same materialistic arguments deviod of
spi ...[text shortened]... the materialists their own
forum and let those that are interested in spirituality discuss it.
By chance I had a look at this thread and read that you have complimented my contributions ! Thanks !!
New forum?
01 May '12 11:38
Back to Top