RE: Peanut Gallery Commentary on the Staff Log of Bannings and such like.
April 5, 2015 at 12:02 am
(This post was last modified: April 5, 2015 at 12:21 am by Whateverist.)
(April 4, 2015 at 4:49 pm)Tonus Wrote:(April 4, 2015 at 4:39 pm)whateverist Wrote: Now you have me curious, which site was that?
http://hardforum.com/
Shows my join date as 2000, but that was the second or third incarnation of the forum. I probably first started posting there in 1995 or 1996. Damn. Twenty years.
Oy vay! Those graphics are pretty hard on the eyes. I can't tell if there is any unifying theme to the site. Is there?
(April 4, 2015 at 4:53 pm)alpha male Wrote:(April 4, 2015 at 4:39 pm)whateveristBut seriously, do you think any xtian website is any where near as open and fair as this one? And I\m talking about the structure of the rules and their enforcement, not the conduct of the members. Wrote: I briefly posted on a one a xtian site but found people enormously defensive and hostile about it. Not every theist who shows up here gets that treatment. When they do it is often because they carry that defensiveness and hostility in here with them.Different sites have different visions and rules. Lots of Christian sites are geared toward sharing and support among Christians, not debate with atheists. They're usually pretty open about that.
Quote:But seriously, do you think any xtian website is any where near as open and fair as this one? And I'm talking about the structure of the rules and their enforcement, not the conduct of the members.I haven't been there in a few years, but yeah, theologyonline was very good.
Their rule number 3 leaves something to be desired:
"3. Thou SHALL NOT be intentionally blasphemous or unnecessarily disruptive. Emphasis on "unnecessarily disruptive." We will ban you if you are presenting yourself as an unneeded distraction (yes this is subjective - live with it). Be mindful of the spirit of the discussion."