Some of you guys know that we suggested the idea that no one should call out another member in a thread because, well, it is just kind of a bad etiquette.

This was not a part of the official rules, but now we have amended that into the rules with a brief explanation (as quoted below).

Atheist Forums Staff Wrote:No Calling Out
Do not any create threads that call out a specific member. Calling out is whenever someone creates a thread that is aimed at a specific member in order to insult him, complain about him, and/or to put him in a awkward position such as by challenging his views or even by asking him questions. This type of attack is sometimes accompanied by a display of a member's username in the title of a thread as well, and that is not allowed either. Any such posts or titles will be edited by the staff as soon as they are brought to our attention.

Even if there is no malicious intent for calling out someone, it might be a little troubling for the other person because he or she may be unwilling to post a reply. To avoid such a problem, you should send a PM to that member if there is something that you want especially him to answer or address in the public area of the forum. If he agrees to engage with you, then you may start the topic that you wished to create, but, again, without calling him out.

Calling out will be allowed only for the purpose of announcing special or important things about another member (such as to announce someone's birthday, for example, or something that you think others might be concerned about). It will not be allowed for supporting anything negative or offensive about any member of this forum. If you feel that it is something that we, the staff, should know about regarding another member, then it is best to discuss the issue with us via the PM system.

http://atheistforums.org/rules.php

I had not noticed this to be a problem.

A certain someone recently called out another someone on the forums by using that certain someone's username in the thread title.

You don't need my approval, but I approve. A two party conversation is better served by: PM, e-mail, phone, yelling over the fence, etc. Bypassing these does tend to unfairly put the addressee in a spot.

Good call, y'all.

I also suggest that if there is something you need to debate with a specific member on a specific subject, under public eye, go for a proper debate on the so aptly named 'debate arena' (really underused). What more would one want?

TL;DR: Fight the idea, not the person.

(August 23, 2013 at 3:50 am)LastPoet Wrote: I also suggest that if there is something you need to debate with a specific member on a specific subject, under public eye, go for a proper debate on the so aptly named 'debate arena' (really underused). What more would one want?

TL;DR: Fight the idea, not the person.

I've been wanting to invite someone to a debate on the stance of humanism vs. nihilism but I'm still not comfortable enough with my own information on nihilism to really be capable of fully debating it.[/unrelated post to OP]

(August 23, 2013 at 3:01 pm)Creed of Heresy Wrote: I've been wanting to invite someone to a debate on the stance of humanism vs. nihilism but I'm still not comfortable enough with my own information on nihilism to really be capable of fully debating it.[/unrelated post to OP]

Well, when you eventually get around to do it, contact the other party, and if both agree with the debate, its just as simple as contacting the staff.

It's almost as if you don't want dramaz here.

(August 24, 2013 at 5:30 am)NoraBrimstone Wrote: It's almost as if you don't want dramaz here.

Who, us? Naaaaah