RE: Make the "civil" discussion part of the forum invisible to non members
November 18, 2018 at 5:53 pm
(This post was last modified: November 18, 2018 at 5:55 pm by Catholic_Lady.)
(November 18, 2018 at 4:57 pm)J a c k Wrote: I don’t think it’s ridiculous. I get it. It’s messy. You’re about to click on a thread, then there it is. It’s the one you’re not a member of. Never mind. You have to be looking twice. It’s annoying.
Another good solution to this would be to make threads from that section come up in a different color, like pink.
(November 18, 2018 at 5:21 pm)Wololo Wrote:(November 18, 2018 at 4:46 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: I get where you’re coming from, but I can’t help but think this is going to level the playing field in a very revealing way. Some theists in this group are better at civility than others, and some of them tend to resort to insults when their points are refuted. So, now EVEYONE has to play by the same rules. Theists have to keep it civil and actually address the rebuttal if and when someone proves a point of theirs wrong, and Atheists have to follow by these same rules as well, so noone can cry, “the atheists didn’t want to talk; they were just mean to me!” I think it’s going to be interesting, if nothing else.
Edit: Just to clarify, I didn’t mean that the people who object to the subforum itself are being snowflakes. Valid points have been made on both sides of the argument. I am talking about the people who want it hidden from the forum at large because they don’t even want to have to see it. I think that’s a bit ridiculous, frankly.
The wanktards are already trying to control the rules over there. It is blatantly apparent that the likes of wooters, am, a theist or cl wanted that section not to have polite debate, but to control what could be debated, how it could be debated and what refutations the opposition could use.
You're right! That is exactly what I want. Thanks hon!

"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