RE: Civility subsection suggestion
May 4, 2018 at 2:19 pm
(This post was last modified: May 4, 2018 at 2:20 pm by Catholic_Lady.)
(May 4, 2018 at 2:16 pm)Joods Wrote:(May 4, 2018 at 1:45 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I'm also confused Joods, because it was your idea to use the debate section instead lol. I'm the one who was saying I don't want to use the debate section because I don't want it to exclude anyone.
Because it is redundant to ask for yet another subforum in a place that is already here for the purposes of discussion. What do you think a forum is? We have subforums to cover nearly all subjects. If you don't like the language that people are free to use here, then scroll on by and read another post. What you are essentially getting around asking, but really want, is a way to police what people can or can't say. Clearly, we have rules that cover that sort of thing.
If theists don't want shit slinging in good threads, then perhaps they shouldn't instigate or bait atheists to begin with. You can't control whether or not people choose to be assholes. In the end, we have some sort of fluff that happens in nearly every single thread here, regardless of topic. Learn to scroll past what you don't want to see and respond to what you do want to see.
I understand that. I just got confused because it seemed you were initially encouraging the use of the debate subforum for civil discussion rather than creating a new open forum for it, but then didn't like it when Neo did just that because it excluded people.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh