(March 10, 2015 at 3:02 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: Of course, no one has the right to be free of offense. But I think we can both agree that a conversation with substance is more edifying than a conversation where one side insists on calling the other "dumbass" without providing any sound reasoning for his position, much less for his use of insult as a tool of argumentation.
I aim to provide substance with my posts. I have no problem presenting the substance rudely to someone who is a twat too me, but in the absence of that condition, I think the conversation is better for it.
I actually prefer no-holds-barred forums like this one, because I can get the true measure of a poster. A vapid poster resorts immediately to insult, as we've seen in this very thread. In a strictly moderated forum, the idiots are more difficult to winnow, because they are prevented from showing their hand immediately.
Word choice is a matter of comfort, not absolutes. I hate the sport of boxing. I cant stand the idea of beating the shit out of someone for sport considering the physical toll it takes . I also hate the fighting in hockey. Do I have a right to demand they stop because I don't like it personally?
I understand the the request at the start, and if the other takes interest in your request and responds positively to it, fine. What I don't like about our species in general is the idea that civility is about playing thought police. Civility is not about demanding taboos. Civility is how you react when offended, not about demanding the silence of others.
