User Suggestions for Future of Atheist Forums

[Angrboda]

Here's something I just thought of, but haven't thought about to consider whether it's good or bad.  Allow one-on-one or group debates in the current debate forum section, just don't have a moderator.  If people who aren't originally invited want, they could PM a member and ask to be invited.  Participants could choose to veto any specific person joining.  (Still spitballing, but participants--maybe--being allowed to eject a participant by majority vote.  Maybe too much Robert's Rules for a discussion, I don't know.)

I thought I did discuss leaving things the way they are and just using the debate section more. Perhaps it was in Ryleh. Then asa suggestion I would suggest a debate type that would be informal like an Impromptu debate with panels and word counts and possibly no round set. It could even start man-to-man (debate type not to be sexist) or have an uneven panel. Topic introduced by a moderator that would have the panel list. As with every debate, a peanut gallery is generated for less restricted content and members of the debate, can't quote outside sources.

 I would even possibly be amenable to drawing up scorecards, or rule sets if that is desired.

Yes, but my suggestion is that the debates in the debate section be essentially self-policed, instead of enlisting the services of a member or staff moderator.

As to my suggestion of having civil threads, marked as such, with participation and civility being, mostly, voluntary. I think it could be successfully implemented with the addition of the following rule:

Civil threads

Something something about the purpose and expectations for behavior and content of civil threads. Explanation of indications that a thread is a civil thread. Members posting in civil threads are asked to police themselves. However, repeated posts containing insults, insulting language, off-topic or inflammatory material, or other disruptive content may incur a thread ban for that particular civil thread. Multiple thread bans for violation of this rule may result in site-wide bans. Repeated site-wide bans for this offense may result in a permanent ban.

[emphasis simply to highlight the important bits, not proposed as part of the rule]

I think with that rule in place, and visible differentiation of civil threads, that should be enough to allow enforcement of civility, while simultaneously allowing some freedom and not requiring as much moderator intervention, while at the same time prevent abuses such as Neo suggested in which people target civil threads for disruption as doing so then has consequences.