Civility subsection suggestion

[Catholic_Lady]

To clarify, my suggestion isn't to make a section where nothing can be offenssive lol. It would be a civility section, not a "you can't say that because it is offenssive" section.

That is where the cookie crumbles. If you can objectively define what would be a civil duscussion, should be easy for us. However, I figure this is something hard.

Well, you came up with the idea, can you give us what would be a clear cut way of sorting the wheat from the shaff?

You can't because every person has own ideas of what would be civil. It can be easily abused.

I don't think "how to be civil" needs to be explained, to be honest. But Vulcan gave a great example a few posts ago of what would allowed vs disallowed. Let me go find it.

---

Here:

"I think homosexuals are choosing to be homosexuals and I think those who support homosexuals are ruining this county." Would have to be allowable in any part of the forums as far as I'm concerned... as well as a possible response to it: "I think that is a bigoted position that is born from ignorance." Both of these must be allowed anywhere on the forum. "Fuck you, you homophobic dickwad," would be an example of something disallowed in the civility section, as well as any slurs or inflammatory remarks from the theists about homosexuals.

[LastPoet]

If that kind of thing gives you pause, perhaps you lack the courage to face such arguments. That, or you can't scroll past, wait for the mods.

As confucious said "injectives only dishonor those ghat uttered them".

I am against this idea, even with your good intentions.

[Catholic_Lady]

Also, am I the only one that just scrolls over posts that do not adress a serious discussion?

I do too. However....

1. It is tedious, especially when there's a ton of them on the more serious type of topics I start.

2. Other people I'm trying to have the discussion with may get caught up responding to/defending themselves against all the shit posting

3. Sometimes I think someone is being genuine so I respond to them, only to see later on that they were never actually interested in having a discussion and I just wasted my time

4. I feel some folks here, particularly newcomers, quickly get discouraged and leave when they join for the purpose of having a discussion and are instead met with "fuck you, moron!" ...and the like lol.

So yeah, I think it would be a positive addition to the forums.

[Catholic_Lady]

I am against this idea, even with your good intentions.

Fair enough. Figured I'd throw the idea out there just in case.

[FFaith]

I like the idea. Right now, many threads go straight to "you fucktard, you fucking asshole" right off the bat based on people's past experience with the OP of whatever thread they're posting in. I think we should still be able to call religion silly or nonsensical or whatever in the civility forum, but we can do that without going overboard and actually add something meaningful to the discussion rather than just shitposting and doing nothing but throwing around insults.

[robvalue]

I already remove from my vision anyone who isn't capable of having a sensible discussion by putting them on ignore. It makes for a much more enjoyable experience.

[johan]

I don't think "how to be civil" needs to be explained, to be honest. But Vulcan gave a great example a few posts ago of what would allowed vs disallowed. Let me go find it.

---

Here:

"I think homosexuals are choosing to be homosexuals and I think those who support homosexuals are ruining this county." Would have to be allowable in any part of the forums as far as I'm concerned... as well as a possible response to it: "I think that is a bigoted position that is born from ignorance." Both of these must be allowed anywhere on the forum. "Fuck you, you homophobic dickwad," would be an example of something disallowed in the civility section, as well as any slurs or inflammatory remarks from the theists about homosexuals.

So where would the following response fall?
FU. It might not be your intention, but I think your statements make you sound like a homophobic dickwad. furthermore I find your position to be bigoted and ignorant. 

Is that over the line or under the line? Who gets to decide? And if its over the line, how is that dealt with?

[LastPoet]

I like the idea. Right now, many threads go straight to "you fucktard, you fucking asshole" right off the bat based on people's past experience with the OP of whatever thread they're posting in. I think we should still be able to call religion silly or nonsensical or whatever in the civility forum, but we can do that without going overboard and actually add something meaningful to the discussion rather than just shitposting and doing nothing but throwing around insults.

I guess its easier and earns more kudos. Don't mind me, I am just here to keep everyone calm, tidy and wirhin the rules, those of wich already being bitched left and right by the forumgoers. On the regular forum. Well, first motion from me in such a subforum is permaban. How wouud that go about determining civility?

What if someone considered your posts insilting? Yeah, leave it to the mods.

Ahh the perfect world where forums wouldn't need moderation. The perfect world where cops, soldiers and jesus would't be needed.

Ahh the irony of things.

[pocaracas]

Well, first motion from me in such a subforum is permaban.

And therein lies one problem...
Does that seem like moderation, or something a bit more extreme?..

[The Valkyrie]

Well, first motion from me in such a subforum is permaban.

And therein lies one problem...
Does that seem like moderation, or something a bit more extreme?..

Nothing should be done in moderation.

Everything should be done to excess.

I'm only labelled a "moderator" because, apparently, there's no title for "Excessive Bitch", and no one would make a colour scheme so my name would show dripping blood.