Civility subsection suggestion

[Ravenshire]

(emphasis is mine)

This is a great question because these things are far greater blocks to serious discussion than any amount of swearing or name calling ever will be.

Deluded and ignorant, no. Dishonest, probably... if the person's dishonesty in the discussion is obvious and disruptive.

What of the willfully ignorant? The ones who deny such and such, are given evidence to the contrary and continue to deny it? Ignorance will crush discourse as fast as dishonesty, especially if they're unwilling to correct their ignorance. Evolution deniers who claim speciation has never happened despite being shown that it has, or claiming that experimental controls mean the scientists are controlling the outcome of the experiments. You can't have a rational, civil conversation with people like this, but the sub forum you're proposing will give them a pulpit to expound from.