[Serious] Make Atheist Forums Great Again (Part 2)

[Belacqua]

---

Also, would it be possible to implement a 30/30 rule on posting [serious] threads? I'd hate to grant passing trolls like CDF immunity from ridicule.

Not the worst idea.

Boru

The reason this problem exists in the first place is because someone judges that another poster deserves ridicule, personal insults, or other off-topic verbal violence. People have argued to me that seriousness requires unseriousness -- ridicule or incivility. 

But if each of us has the right (some say the duty) to switch off our reasonable arguments and go for vileness when we judge that the other person isn't deserving, then nothing will change. Because the people posting vile language always feel it's justified. 

If a stupid person makes a thread and asks that it be serious, why should we deny that?

[Tiberius]

I dig it.

I also dig that if people want to make a joke, they can... they just gotta contribute to the conversation to justify it. I also think that (ideally) the prohibition on jokes should be loosely enforced, while insults and the like enforced more strictly.

---

Also, would it be possible to implement a 30/30 rule on posting [serious] threads? I'd hate to grant passing trolls like CDF immunity from ridicule. I understand if that can't be implemented, but it's a concern that springs to mind.

Yeah, I think loosely enforcing the jokes rule is a good idea. The intention is to promote serious discussion and avoid having someone just mess around and waste people's time. The occasional witty remark should be tolerated, especially if the discussion has gone in a direction that merits it.

I like the 30/30 suggestion and it's actually something we can handle automatically.

[Losty]

Not the worst idea.

Boru

The reason this problem exists in the first place is because someone judges that another poster deserves ridicule, personal insults, or other off-topic verbal violence. People have argued to me that seriousness requires unseriousness -- ridicule or incivility. 

But if each of us has the right (some say the duty) to switch off our reasonable arguments and go for vileness when we judge that the other person isn't deserving, then nothing will change. Because the people posting vile language always feel it's justified. 

If a stupid person makes a thread and asks that it be serious, why should we deny that?

No one is advocating banning stupid people from making serious threads though. It seems like the suggestion is to restrict new users from making [serious] threads in order to prevent [serious] troll threads.
I don’t think it’s a bad idea in theory, but we are going to get troll threads from time to time whether they’re marked [serious] or not so I don’t know if the benefits outway the downside which would be to deny legitimate new users the ability to make a [serious] thread where they know they can be free from insults. It’s definitely something to think about.

[Belacqua]

they know they can be free from insults.

And I think we don't need to insult them. If they're trying to make trouble, we can just refuse to help them. 

Drawing the parameters for when insulting is good just seems strange to me.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Not the worst idea.

Boru

The reason this problem exists in the first place is because someone judges that another poster deserves ridicule, personal insults, or other off-topic verbal violence. People have argued to me that seriousness requires unseriousness -- ridicule or incivility. 

But if each of us has the right (some say the duty) to switch off our reasonable arguments and go for vileness when we judge that the other person isn't deserving, then nothing will change. Because the people posting vile language always feel it's justified. 

If a stupid person makes a thread and asks that it be serious, why should we deny that?

The whole point of Serious threads is to keep the discussion on topic.  Vulcan's suggestion was to limit participation in these particular threads until a new member passes 30 days/30 posts.

No one is saying you can't go for vileness, just not in threads tagged as Serious.  You will have the whole rest of the forum to be as vile as you like.  You could even start threads 'Please Be Vile Here'.

Stupid people can make as many serious threads as they like - Vulcan's idea doesn't address the intelligence of the poster, just their behavior. But it might be a good idea to give them a little bit of time in the forum to grasp how this rule works (we get new members who clearly haven't read the rules). Giving them time to learn might result in fewer people being banned from Serious threads.

Boru

[Losty]

they know they can be free from insults.

And I think we don't need to insult them. If they're trying to make trouble, we can just refuse to help them. 

Drawing the parameters for when insulting is good just seems strange to me.

Insulting isn’t the only thing that’s restricted in a [serious] thread though. If someone makes an obvious troll thread, members shouldn’t be required to take them seriously.

[ignoramus]

Can we report a [Serious] thread if we suspect someone wants to poke/troll by asking eg: a loaded question?
EG; [Serious ] Why are atheists angry at God?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Can we report a [Serious] thread if we suspect someone wants to poke/troll by asking eg: a loaded question?
EG; [Serious ] Why are atheists angry at God?

Since that title wouldn't violate the Thread Title rule, and since [Serious] threads are content-based, I would wait to see how that particular thread develops before making a report.

Boru

[vulcanlogician]

they know they can be free from insults.

And I think we don't need to insult them. If they're trying to make trouble, we can just refuse to help them. 

Drawing the parameters for when insulting is good just seems strange to me.

Dude, I know where you are coming from, Belaqua, but trolls that come here looking for a scrap will be a good outlet for any hostile energies that exist in the forum. More serious theists (and anyone else) can post a [serious] thread to have a [serious] discussion. Fuck the trolls. They don't need or deserve any special protection.

[Belacqua]

And I think we don't need to insult them. If they're trying to make trouble, we can just refuse to help them. 

Drawing the parameters for when insulting is good just seems strange to me.

Dude, I know where you are coming from, Belaqua, but trolls that come here looking for a scrap will be a good outlet for any hostile energies that exist in the forum. More serious theists (and anyone else) can post a [serious] thread to have a [serious] discussion. Fuck the trolls. They don't need or deserve any special protection.

The trolls have judged that, due to your beliefs and your behavior, you deserve to be ridiculed and insulted. In return, we judge that they deserve to be ridiculed and insulted. 

As long as each of us thinks we have the right and the duty to behave this way, the ridicule and insults will prevail.

I can't stop their behavior, but I can stop acting like them.