Civility subsection suggestion

[GrandizerII]

Or perhaps a self-moderated forum where the thread creator defines a list of users who are allowed to participate in their first post, and they control the discussion.

Just saw this. That's a baaad idea. This would start to reek of some form of popularism/elitism.

[ignoramus]

Are emojis allowed?

EG: I believe in this thing called God who I have a personal relationship with ....

OK, very interesting!, do go on ....

[Catholic_Lady]

It would be for pretty much anyone who wants to have honest discussion about topics that may spark controversy (religion, politics, philosophy, morality, etc), without having to comb through the shit slinging and irrelevant posts that are just there to mock the OP.  

This would be beneficial to the theists, the atheists who have opinions that deviate from the norm, and anyone who enjoyes honest discussion of opposing views and exchange of ideas.

The point is to encourage diversity and encourage discussion of opposing views - making this place overall less like an echo chamber.

Perhaps when a new member joins, they can get an automatic PM telling them about the introduction subforum and about this particular subforum. So then they would know about it.

Sooooooo, do you have a suggested way of keeping the "shit slingers" out? Keep them from not posting? Keep the report function from not being abused? Is this a "by special permission" sub forum?

I applaud your motives, I see little about implementation, monitoring and rules of engagement.

No, I don't like the special permission thing. My intention is for it to be like any other subforum where anyone can jump in if they want, not like the debate format at all.

Perhaps I'm giving y'all too much credit, lol, but I honestly don't think it would be that hard to regulate. People will know that section is specific for civil discussion, and they have the whole rest of the forum to say whatever they want. I tjink most people would follow the rules as they do in the Introduction section. We are all adults here.

[Joods]

I'm against it. We have a perfectly good debate section. The fact that people do not take advantage of it is not a problem with the structure of AF.

Debate threads are invitation only and participants can set their own rules. There is no reason that someone cannot put up a "Call to Debate: (topic)" in the appropriate forum to solicit participants the way Mafia Games are organized.

This is exactly what I said in the other thread about the fact that we have a debate section. Honestly, putting yet more limitations on what we are or are not allowed to say is just absurd. If people want serious discussion, they can utilize the debate section.

---

No problem. And no, what im suggesting here is not a debate forum. I specified as much on the OP.

That's what I gather... a normal forum section where the rules impose civility, friendliness, etc... much like the intro section.
That would have the benefit of believers feeling better, as the evil atheists wouldn't jump to insults.

bold mine. 

That runs both ways. There have been plenty of times where a theist jumps right in with the insults the second their opinions get challenged and they are asked to give proof by an atheist. Or they quote mine shit to death just to prove a completely irrelevant point in a thread that has nothing to do with what was spent minimal time finding and quoting. 

There are plenty of forums out there in the WWW that cater to the religious and who will instantly and gladly ban any atheists that come along and try to reasonably share a differing point of view. We don't do that here. If the rules are going to change so that we have to walk on eggshells just to appease the feelings of those who believe in a god, then you might find yourself losing some valuable participants.  I for one, shouldn't have to have a limit placed on what I can say or how I can respond to someone who posts views that I don't agree with. This is an "Atheist forum" and this is my comfort spot. Yes, theists are welcome, and gladly so. But asking for these sorts of restrictions in a new sub-forum when we already have another sub-forum in place to have rational discussion, is really redundant.

I think this is a very slippery slope to try and walk here. We have enough rules now as it is. Adding yet another sub-forum to the site, which places restrictions on how or what we can say is unwise, given the lack of enforcement with some of the rules we have in place now. More often than not - when a post is made and someone has an issue with it, we have to rely on staff opinion to determine whether or not a rule was broken. Proposing this new sub-form just won't work. Half the time the "prime directive" of many threads gets totally ignored and nothing is done when stuff is actually reported. In addition, new people constantly fail to actually read the rules anyway so a sub-forum limiting what can be said isn't going to suddenly make anyone read or follow those rules.

[Ravenshire]

The problem I see with this is most people don’t go to specific forums to find threads, they find threads using the search features. So a person might not realize they are in a strictly moderated environment.

I would suggest using the debate forum more.

This. So much this. People already occasionally run afoul of the "be nice to the new guy" rule in the introduction forum because they clicked into the thread from search results.

Since the debate forum is not restricted to one-on-one debates, I would concur with others that the debate forum would be the best place to have those serious discussions.

Or perhaps a self-moderated forum where the thread creator defines a list of users who are allowed to participate in their first post, and they control the discussion.

Would the rule about limiting thread participation be tossed out in this sub forum? What if the person starting the thread is on your ignore list? I see many problems with a sub forum with different rules that can be searched along with all other sub forums. I sincerely believe that if this sub forum were to be implemented, that it should be on a membership basis, much like A69, but without the age restrictions, so that people aren't stumbling into protected threads and calling everybody fucktards.

[brewer]

No, I don't like the special permission thing. My intention is for it to be like any other subforum where anyone can jump in if they want, not like the debate format at all.

Perhaps I'm giving y'all too much credit, lol, but I honestly don't think it would be that hard to regulate. People will know that section is specific for civil discussion, and they have the whole rest of the forum to say whatever they want. I tjink most people would follow the rules as they do in the Introduction section. We are all adults here.

If we were all adults here there wouldn't be your desire for a special sub forum.

[The Valkyrie]

No, I don't like the special permission thing. My intention is for it to be like any other subforum where anyone can jump in if they want, not like the debate format at all.

Perhaps I'm giving y'all too much credit, lol, but I honestly don't think it would be that hard to regulate. People will know that section is specific for civil discussion, and they have the whole rest of the forum to say whatever they want. I tjink most people would follow the rules as they do in the Introduction section. We are all adults here.

If we were all adults here there wouldn't be your desire for a special sub forum.

Yeah, CL.

Who the hell are you accusing of being an adult?!

*Is offended*

[SteelCurtain]

I'd be okay with this a bit more if it were an invite only forum akin to Area 69.

You get in after 60/60 and staff votes on whether you are a good fit. You get kicked out permanently if you fuck up.

My only worry, and it's a big one, is that all substantive conversation would migrate into that forum, and the outer forum would be a shit show, and we'd dry up on new membership.

[Catholic_Lady]

No, I don't like the special permission thing. My intention is for it to be like any other subforum where anyone can jump in if they want, not like the debate format at all.

Perhaps I'm giving y'all too much credit, lol, but I honestly don't think it would be that hard to regulate. People will know that section is specific for civil discussion, and they have the whole rest of the forum to say whatever they want. I tjink most people would follow the rules as they do in the Introduction section. We are all adults here.

If we were all adults here there wouldn't be your desire for a special sub forum.

Maybe I'm being overly charitable, but I feel people here are generally good about following the rules. If someone wants to shit post, they have the entire rest of the forum to do so. I can't fathom why any person would have such a hard time with this.

[SteelCurtain]

Maybe I'm being overly charitable, but I feel people here are generally good about following the rules. If someone wants to shit post, they have the entire rest of the forum to do so. I can't fathom why any person would have such a hard time with this.

I'm not concerned with the people that actually break the rules. I'm more concerned with the people that think other people are breaking the rules.

The number of erroneous reports generated when someone says "that's stupid" is the issue.