RE: Civility subsection suggestion
May 3, 2018 at 11:45 am
(This post was last modified: May 3, 2018 at 11:47 am by Edwardo Piet.)
(May 3, 2018 at 11:32 am)Jörmungandr Wrote:(May 3, 2018 at 11:17 am)alpha male Wrote: In a serious discussion, you show that a person is dishonest, deluded, or ignorant with facts.
You didn't answer the question. Typically in these sorts of discussion, the dishonest, deluded, or ignorant person will simply ignore such evidence and continue on in the same fashion. Should dishonest, deluded, or ignorant people be banned from such threads after evidence has been provided?
Nah just put them on ignore and allow them to chat with the other dishonest, deluded or ignorant people.
(May 3, 2018 at 11:37 am)alpha male Wrote:(May 3, 2018 at 11:32 am)Jörmungandr Wrote: You didn't answer the question.
Yeah, I pretty much did. You're now asking a different question.
No you answered a different question. Jor asked you if it would be considered uncivil to call someone dishonest, deluded or ignorant and you responded by saying it should be shown with facts.
Regardless of whether it is shown or not... would it be considered uncivil to call someone dishonest, deluded or ignorant? Yes or no?
