josh knauer wrote:
Jim- You do raise a good point and one worthy of consideration. I actually welcome real discussion on this point (if you don't have something substantive to contribute... don't post here).
My intent behind creating the rules here was to create a safe place for people to disagree. It is possible to debate without being disrespectful or attacking others. I really believe this, but I do wonder if it is possible on such a hot button issue like animal rights. The enviro side of this board seems to stay cordial enough, but clearly the animal concerns area is not.
What to do? Suggestions? Are there other forums that you visit that deal effectively with heated subjects? I have no interest in having a one-sided forum, so I'm more interested in other places that deal with controversial topics effectively.
what to do? get more black and white with what is allowable or not.
#1 id prefer no holds barred, but that's just be me.
#2 but if you can't do no holds barred, disallow all forms of insults and the little creative jabs that circumvent the rules.
#3 just because you are personally sick of hearing a word,instance or name, don't ban it's use as when folks talk of "the poster who won't be named" we all know who is being spoken of. and in my opinion the avoidance of being able to reference particular items is just childish. i get this image of me saying "phantomuk" and others covering their ears screaming..lalalalalala.
#4 dont set yourself up to be "babysitter" or "king of all" by ripping on behavior or scolding. if you truly don't care what a poster thinks...just take care of business and ban where ya think is necessary. talking down to people about what you percieve as their percieved behavior issues puts you in a seemingly dictatorial position that can and will stifle honest debate.
#5 dont encourage whining to the feedback forum as has been done. my purpose for bringing up the whole apology thread thing was to show a pattern of squeaky wheels getting grease. my whole purpose for getting al offensive to ranka was to expose the natural hypocrasy of "underhanded goading" as opposed to just out and out honestly stating feelings on a subject. if you look back at that (turkey)thread....things were moving along famously prior to that.
#6 black or white....no in between will give you less of an image of taking sides by either side. ill ask you to recall what y'all were accused of just prior to the banning of phantom. you were accused of one sided slant, while others on the opposite side of the coin view a one sided slant as well going the opposite direction.
as for other boards....well i've liked fmb because one can say...you are a so n so. and the reply to that can be to ignore it or to say...you are a such n such. ok now that slam was retaliated against...now move on. people at fmb when they go too far are policed by each other.....if someone says "asians are cruel and heinous" the bigotry of that statement is called out without hesitation. you may only see the sillyness of the boob topics when visiting there...but there is alot of discussion that goes on there. other boards that have "up for grabs rules" all appear to be slanted. another board i go to on the other hand does not allow any type of slamming or slander at all period.....none...nada. it works ok....there is really not alot of debate there except just a few issues here n there.